Gingrich, Romney take shots at each other on immigration policy

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich may or may not have "stepped in it" (as Rick Perry might say) when he spoke out in favor of a relatively moderate position on immigration policy in Tuesday night's GOP presidential debate. Either way, he isn't backing down from his position -- and he seems intent on making immigration a headache for his main rival as well.

During Tuesday's CNN foreign policy debate, Gingrich said the U.S. should not break up families of immigrants who entered the United States illegally if they meet certain criteria. He acknowledged it was a risky position for a Republican and said he'd be willing to "take the heat" for it.

In response to Gingrich's remarks, Romney said America should not "have an amnesty system that says that people who come here illegally get to stay for the rest of their life in this country legally."

On Wednesday Gingrich went on the offensive, highlighting evidence that suggested Romney also has a relatively moderate stance on the issue. Gingrich tweeted a link to a video of Romney on NBC's "Meet the Press" in 2007. The clip shows Romney saying that those in the country illegally "should begin a process towards application for citizenship."

In his tweet, Gingrich asked, "So what's your position on citizenship for illegals again? (I oppose it.)"

Gingrich also emailed the link to the press and his supporters, charging that the "Meet the Press" clip "could explain why after the debate Tuesday night, his advisor -- after seven direct questions -- would not answer what he would do with the millions of illegal immigrants already here."

In fact, Gingrich's position is not far off from Romney's -- Gingrich just took the extra step of naming some criteria by which undocumented immigrants could be allowed to stay in the country.

The former House speaker said recent immigrants should be sent home if they are found out, but "if you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out."

The full statement Romney gave on "Meet the Press," as the Romney camp later provided, doesn't sound too different:

"My own view is, consistent with what you saw in the Lowell Sun, that those people who had come here illegally and are in this country, the 12 million or so that are here illegally, should be able to sign up for permanent residency or citizenship, but they should not be given a special pathway, a special guarantee that all of them get to stay here for the rest of their lives merely by virtue of having come here illegally, and that, I think, is the great flaw in the final bill that came forward from the Senate."

Romney clarified his position on Wednesday in Iowa saying, "Those people who've come to the country illegally should not have a special path, should not have a special pathway that is preferable to those that stand in line in their home countries to be able to come to this country."

He said that what Gingrich was describing could be called it was amnesty, and that it was a "mistake" to try to say which groups of immigrants should be given amnesty.

"How about the people who've been here 20 years, how about 12 years, how about 10, five, three," he said. "How may children do you have to have to apply this principle?"

The response out of Iowa -- the first state to hold its presidential nominating contest -- suggests that Gingrich's remarks could hurt his new standing as a frontrunner.

Craig Robinson, a former Iowa Republican Party political director who runs TheIowaRepublican.com, said, "Gingrich's stubbornness on this issue will make winning the Iowa caucuses much more difficult. The only thing that will be remembered in this debate is Gingrich's pro-amnesty position."

Tim Albrecht, communications director for Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R), tweeted: "Newt did himself significant harm tonight on immigration among caucus and primary voters...GOP-led Iowa House passed Dream Act 99-0 and in next election were wiped out up and down. Newt mis-stepped tonight."

[TeaParty4RonPaul]

Newt Gingrich's Skeleton Closet

http://www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm


Foreign Policy Experts Agree With Ron Paul

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/11/13/foreign-policy-experts-agree-with-ron-paul/

[XAmericanPrideX]

Anyone who says that they want to secure the border and then turns around and says that they want to reward ANY of the illegal alien law breaking INVADERS with being allowed to remain in our country doesn't have the stones to be president of the USA! People who don't respect our laws or borders don't resect our country or people. Those people don't deserve to be allowed to remain in our country no matter how long they have managed to stay here, how many anchor babies they have burrowed in with or what church they belong to... period. They have already cost the American taxpayers a fortune in education of their children, medical care and incarceration for the worst of them. They have already cost us countless American lives that didn't need to be lost if our government had only enforced our current immigration laws. To allow ANY of these trespassers to remain in our country will only serve to send a message to others that if they are able to get into our country, build a family and lay low and stay out of trouble long enough the stupid Americans will once again reward lawlessness with a permanent home here. We know that's exactly the message that they will get and that more will come because we have been through it several times... and each time we end up with more illegals than the last time. NO THANK YOU!
To Newt and the other bleeding hearts who don't want to break up their families, their anchor babies have dual citizenship so they can pack up their kids and take them with them! And don't let them fool you with that ridiculous BS about their kids not being able to speak the language of their parents so they won't be able to assimilate in their parents' countries. A good 90+% of those kids have been interpreters for their parents all of their lives because their parents usually refuse to learn English!!! STOP BEING SUCKERS FOR THEIR SOB STORIES! They made the choice to come here knowing full well what the consequences could be for them and any children that THEY CHOSE to have. That's THEIR problem and responsibility. We are not responsible for the problems that they created for themselves or their children but we have already been paying for their choices. Until we ALL get this reality through our heads and start enforcing our laws on ALL who break them we will never secure our border because there will always be those who are willing to risk coming here and our laws will be nothing but a joke!!!
And to those who feel the urge to whine 'racist' or 'bigot'... I'm an American of Mexican descent, 2nd generation. I don't care where these people come from, if they come here illegally they need to GO HOME! We don't have to pay to deport them. All we have to do is enforce our laws without apology on ALL who break them and make it impossible for them to work or live here. We'll save a fortune in taxpayer dollars and gain plenty of jobs for American citizens an legal residents in the process.

[Ben37221]

The problem with Mitt Romney is that he has no core value. Whereever the wind blow that is where he goes. You name it, every topic, he have been on both sides. He changes with the wind. America is not looking for a chameleon in cheif.

[westerly1]

There are easy solutions, if people would get off their ideological behinds. We almost had a fix under President Bush. Guest worker program, fiing & reporting requirements, computer data base & monitoring,and possibly paying a fine for illegal entry; all ways to control immigration. I agree with speaker Gingrich that a humane solution is possible if we want a solution.

Narco-terrorism is another matter. The drug cartel network is spreading & growing throughout our country. It must be defeated and military intervention may be necessary as we are doing in Pakistan. The use of drones, special ops and rapid response teams are needed along the border. But let's face it; unless we close the borders & cut off trade with Mexico, we cannot completely stop illegal activity.

So I think we need a carrot & stick approach with a guest worker program that rewards legal entry into this country; and strong action and stiff penalties for illegal activity. Those here illegally would be allowed a path to legality; not citizenship.

[franknkissy]

We here wish these politicians would - either dem or repub stop playing football with poor-worker hispanics who have been chased from their native lands by greedy war-like american muti-national corporations ! And have come to the U.S.A. as their final resort to escape the killing fields our government and military have made of their centro & sud-americano homes ! So Newt & Mitt keep to your moderate stances ! A loving God would want no other thing !

Frank - Paz Intercesor ..

[retm-w]

Guess their wages weren't low enough after stealing American jobs, those greedy corporations found cheaper wages in other countries. Now they want to come here and steal what we have left.

[TexFandango]

We need to budget for a change to the Statue of Liberty. What would be the cost of altering the current inscription:

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Following the pure and intransigent demands of social conservatives, it should be changed to:

"Give me your engineers, your rich business class yearning for a MacMansion, tired of wretched state TV and yearning for 350-channel cable. Send these, the well-protected, affluent, ruling-class to me, and I will lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Ah, that's more like it. As for all those malcontents with thoughts of escaping squalor, abject poverty, religious persecution, death squads, kidnappings, and social anarchy: Pull yourselves together and learn to become software designers. Only then will you be welcome.

[Ben37221]

You put it so eloquently. I wonder what the republicans plan to do with the 12 million illigals currently here.

[TexFandango]

Consider the financial implications of universal deportation for all illegal immigrants:

11,000,000 illegals x one year incarceration (pre- and post-trial detention) x legal aid & court costs x airfare x law enforcement costs (likely a new government agency tasked solely with investigating, finding, and arresting 11,000,000 illegals) = $847 billion.

Add to those direct costs the indirect costs that will arise when agriculture and service industry costs soar 50+% due to labor shortages. Another $150+ billion. After securing our boarders, you don't think we can find a solution with a better return on investment - let alone one that is more humane?

If the Super Committee can't find $1.3 trillion to cut, where on earth will an additional trillion come from? What price political purity?