Which Republican presidential candidates support amnesty?

 

From: American Thinker, By: Pedro Gonzales, On: February 1, 2015. See the article HERE.

Amnesty

Which Republican presidential candidates support amnesty?  I have analyzed all the major Republican presidential candidates (except Ben Carson and Rick Sanctorum, who are long shots, and Donald Trump, who has undocumented hair).  I have found that all the major presidential candidates support amnesty for illegal aliens, except for one.  Can you guess which one?

Jeb Bush: Jeb, as we all know, supports amnesty for illegal aliens, and he’s proud of it.  If he were running in Honduras, I would vote for him in a minute.

Marco Rubio: Marco Rubio co-authored a bill that would have given amnesty to illegal aliens.  He has since tried to walk back from that, saying:

… that he’s learned he was wrong on his approach to immigration reform.

Rubio, a onetime Tea Party favorite whose support for a comprehensive immigration reform package hurt him with the base, told the conservative crowd that he now understands U.S. borders must be secured before anything else can be done. what I’ve learned is you can’t even have a conversation about that until people believe and know, not just believe but it’s proven to them that future illegal immigration will be controlled.

And if you believe that, I have a taco truck in Juárez I’d like to sell you.  I think it’s pretty clear that he still supports amnesty, but now he promises not to talk about it until he’s elected.

Chris Christie: Chris has been cagey on the subject, but one thing is clear: he ordered his appointee to Frank Lautenberg’s Senate seat to vote for Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill.

Rick Perry: Rick Perry is tough on illegal immigrants!  He sent a handful of national guard troops to the border!  (With orders not to arrest any illegals.)  But as for those illegals who manage to slip through this imposing gauntlet, Perry rewards them with taxpayer-subsidized college educations.  If he’s paying for illegals to go to college, I think it’s safe to say he supports amnesty.

Mike Huckabee: Wikipedia says it much better than I:

In February 2007, Huckabee had stated, “We shouldn’t have amnesty where we just say, “Fine, everybody’s good, we’re going to let it go.” We should have a process where people can pay the penalties, step up and accept responsibility for not being here legally. But here’s the point. The objective is not to be punitive. The objective is to make things right. Right for us. Right for them.” Huckabee said it’s irrational to deport twelve million people and supported a pathway to citizenship,

I don’t know why, but for some reason Huckabee reminds me of Porky Pig’s “fat friar” character from the Daffy Duck cartoons.

Scott Walker: Scott Walker backed the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill in 2006.  But that was nine years ago!  Perhaps his position has evolved now.  Okay, here’s what he said in 2013, less than two years ago:

He went as far as to tell POLITICO in 2013 that he supported a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants provided “people who are in line right now have first preference.”

Scott Walker may be good on many things, but he supports amnesty.  Period. It’s a shame, because he has really good hair.

Rand Paul: Rand Paul claims he’s against amnesty, but he voted for an amendment to give 2 million “temporary” visas to illegal aliens annually…who could then apply for citizenship.  It looks like amnesty to me.  Unless you’re an illegal, in prison, or a drug addict, I can’t see why you’d vote for Rand.  What bothers me is his duplicity about it, his effort to have it both ways.  At least Jeb has the guts to be honest about what he is.

Ted Cruz: Ted Cruz is the only major candidate who has never supported or endorsed amnesty.

  • End Obama’s illegal amnesty via Congress’ checks & balances. (Nov 2014)
  • Defund amnesty, and refuse any nominees until rescinded. (Nov 2014)
  • No path to citizenship for 1.65 million illegals in Texas. (Oct 2012)
  • Give police more power to ask about immigration status. (Jun 2012)
  • Boots on the ground, plus a wall. (Apr 2012)
  • Triple the size of the Border Patrol. (Mar 2012)
  • Strengthen border security and increase enforcement. (Jul 2011)

He’s resolute, he’s firm, he’s good on most of the other issues, and he has Spanishy good looks.  What more could you want?

So if illegal immigration is important to you, you should vote for Ted Cruz but also support Marco Rubio.

~~~~~~~~~~

Some of you may wonder (as I did) why Mr. Gonzales encourages us to vote for Ted Cruz as being the only one of those vying for the Republican nomination who is firmly against amnesty, and at the same time, also urges us to also support Marco Rubio. If you check out his link you’ll see that Rubio can choose to run for president or run for reelection to the U.S. Senate – but not both.

Mr. Gonzales figures that Rubio will lose the presidential nomination and will have given up his Senate seat – thus removing Rubio from any elected office. That is apparently Mr. Gonzales’ desire.

I don’t know about you, but I’m not a “single issue” voter; I’ll scrutinize a candidate’s position on several issues that are important to me and make my decision accordingly. Amnesty is perhaps my most highly weighted issue and a wobbly-on-amnesty candidate had better walk on water on all other issues for me to consider him/her – not very likely. I don’t believe that an admittedly pro-amnesty candidate can win the Republican nomination – at least, I hope so.

We are unfortunately fighting not only the democrats, but also the RNC establishment, so it’s important that we conservatives come together behind conservative candidates for the nomination. We can’t just give up and forfeit the nomination to Bush or Christie or whomever the establishment pushes. Now is the time for all of us to make our voices heard – loud and clear – and, as soon as possible. We need to winnow down the slate of candidates to a first choice (mine is Ted Cruz) and perhaps a second (mine is still vacillating between Walker and Perry) and raise holy hell with the establishment hierarchy until they listen.

Some will say, “they won’t listen, so why bother.” That is a defeatist attitude and won’t win any battles. The only way that the establishment will listen is if we can muster large enough numbers and refuse to contribute to the RNC or any establishment funding – instead contributing directly to our chosen candidate. If we can dry up grass roots’ contributions, we can get their attention and exert some influence. What advantage do the high-roller donors get from supporting another losing candidate? None.

We have to convince them that a conservative candidate CAN win and that we (the grass roots) will support a real conservative candidate with our energy, our influence, and our money.

My .02 cents worth.

Garnet92

 

Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Which Republican presidential candidates support amnesty?

  1. captbogus2 says:

    Your ‘2 cents worth’ echoes what I have been saying for some time. Sooner or later the GOPe has to learn that without the conservative base THEY CAN NOT WIN the Oval Office!
    Dole ran and the base stayed home.
    McCain ran and the base stayed home.
    Romney ran and the base stayed home.
    Maybe even the Perpetually Stupid Party hierarchy will figure it out before 2016.
    Do ya’ think?

    • Garnet92 says:

      No capt, I don’t. A 2×4 upside the head might help, but they’re so entrenched in their philosophies the only thing that will move them is self-preservation. If the shoe were on the other foot, If we outnumbered them, you’d better believe that they wouldn’t have the internal fortitude to stay their course, they’d jump to our side. They are spineless.

  2. Kathy says:

    Rubio turned out to be a huge disappointment when he started flip-flopping the minute he got into office. He’s not very good at being a senator and a far cry from presidential material. Cruz on the other hand, has been rock solid since day one.

    I agree 100% with your comments and the idea of supporting the candidate of choice rather than the party. But don’t we also need to let the RNC know where we stand? Isn’t it up to us to push them to support the right candidate?

    I stopped contributing to them long ago and repeatedly send back their questionnaires with my explanation why. But if others aren’t doing that, then we need to hammer that message home, I think. Just as we have to keep pounding our representatives to listen, we need to keep pounding them too.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Right Kathy, Rubio was a rising star up until he fell in with the “gang of eight” and he’s going to have a tough time overcoming that faux pas. It’s similar to when Perry had his “oops” moment, he never recovered from it – and perhaps STILL hasn’t. Amnesty is such a polarizing issue – you’re either fur it or agin it, and most conservatives are WAY agin it. I personally also don’t get the “elder statesman” vibe from Rubio that I’d like to see in our POTUS, a certain lack of gravitas.

      I just read an interesting article on why neither Cruz nor Rubio seem to have been progressing over the past few months – it’s an interesting read. Here’s a LINK.

    • captbogus2 says:

      Sometimes I think of sending the GOP a small contribution just so in the ensuing years I can send their request for more contributions back with that message.

  3. BrianR says:

    I love Cruz, and would vote for him in a heartbeat; he can legitimately claim the Reagan Mantle, IMO. But I’m surprised no one’s mentioned Jindal. I think he’s seriously gearing up to take a run, and he’s got the right chops, too. Further, he’s proven his electability by becoming Governor of Louisiana, for decades a stronghold of corrupt Dem/socialism.

    Kathy, as to your questions, that’s a good part of a strategy, but the biggest obstacle is that the Establishment GOP is in thrall to PACs like Rove’s, and institutional contributors like the pro-amnesty Chamber of Commerce.

    This is a battle within that party that goes back for over 50 years, to the Goldwater Era. In fact, Reagan himself had to battle the “Rockefeller Wing” — what the Establishment was called back in those days — and actually lost the nomination the first time he tried. Even in 1980, his biggest opponent was the Establishment candidate, George Bush. The Establishment GOP actually HATED Reagan (though now every candidate that comes down the pike falsely and hypocritically claims to be Reagan reincarnated).

    It’s a real problem.

    • Kathy says:

      Thanks for the enlightenment, Brian, but that just reaffirms what I said. That tells me we have all the more reason to flood the RNC with emails and letters.

    • Garnet92 says:

      We can agree on Cruz. He’s an intelligent individual with some awesome legal chops who is a debate champion and quick on his feet – and he’s a solid conservative.

      He’s shown everyone that he’s got the cojones to stand and fight, even when he must know that he’d lose. But he’s got two problems: he’s been characterized as a “bomb thrower” for his Senate “filibuster” and, this one is troubling for some conservatives, he doesn’t fit what some believe to be the “natural born” citizen that the Constitution calls for. Personally, if today’s “legal scholars” believe that he is qualified (and most do), that’s good enough for me.

      As far as Jindal goes, I liked him from the beginning, but when I questioned friends and family living in Louisiana, they don’t like him at all. Especially my brother and son. Neither will vote for him if he’s the candidate. I don’t have all of the particulars (yet) about why, but both are staunch conservatives and they don’t like him.

      • BrianR says:

        Well, it was to be expected that Cruz would be so characterized. Look at who did the characterization. Reagan was also hated and vilified by some of his “allies” and the press alike.

        I’d be interested in hearing more about why your relatives don’t like Jindal, because I haven’t seen ANYthing about him that I thought was negative.

        • Garnet92 says:

          I’ll post it when I get more details. My brother is partially retired, but still works with the chemical industry and my son owns his own business. As I said, both are conservative and their response surprised me – I expected them to be pro-Jindal. Both live in Baton Rouge which is the State Capital and the Governor’s Mansion is there – maybe his entourage ties up traffic????

    • captbogus2 says:

      Isn’t it strange that all the candidates claim to be Reagan incarnate but fail to adopt Reagan’s policies…

  4. Hardnox says:

    Conservatism has worked every time it was tried. No other method has that track record. None. Conversely, socialism, communism, fascism, marxism have always failed whenever or wherever it was tried.

    The problem with the whole amnesty issue and the flip-flopping of candidates is MONEY and who is shelling it out. Remove the money stream and support will evaporate.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Right Nox. I don’t know of ANY conservatives who are continuing to send money to any part of the Republican Party. I think that the key to combating the establishment RINOs is for we conservatives to coalesce behind a SINGLE CANDIDATE (hopefully by the end of the year) and shower the RNC with letters, emails, phone calls, etc. AND sending our dollars to our chosen candidate, NOT to the RNC.

      We must tell them in no uncertain terms, and in unison, that WE WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANOTHER RINO CANDIDATE – and if we can do so in large numbers, they will be forced to weigh their options and at least consider whether another loss would be a smart expenditure of contributed funds. With little or no grass-roots support, the bean-counters will become cautious, they can’t afford to lose 71% of the party’s conservatives (51% conservative, 20% very conservative, according to Gallup). Even if only the very conservatives rebel, that is a large enough group that insure that Republicans can’t win without us.

      At some point, even the Karl Roves of the world have to weigh “success with a reduced influence conservative candidate” as opposed to “losing again with a hand-picked moderate.”

    • captbogus2 says:

      Once again. Enforce laws against HIRING illegal aliens with fines and jail time and watch the illegal problem self correct and politicians actually acting a tad more conservative.

  5. Russ R says:

    Garnet, I read with interest your ‘discussion’ after another thread the last couple days, and now this. I can’t help but open my big mouth: Obviously you are a Patriot who loves America. I believe that that’s exactly what the GOP does NOT want. I know, that’s not news, they’ve said as much -about Conservatives, all Bush’s BS about winning without Conservatives. But it’s starting to dawn on me that it’s much more than that. I think the Republicans would PREFER TO LOSE than to have our help. They don’t mind being 2nd fiddle as long as they can share power and they DESPISE us. They see getting rid of Conservatives and sharing power as MORE important than the Country, Constitution, whatever. If I understood you correctly 2 days ago, you believe it’s more important to vote for Bush or whomever than to stay home and “protest.” I don’t think they WANT your vote. They would rather choose another looser ON PURPOSE than to have Ted Cruz or another Patriot. My point? Sorry. I can see that YOU are a person who tries to have solutions, I don’t have any; they don’t WANT us. Dark times getting darker thanks to RINOs squandering the recent election. Just reality. I’m not rich but I’ve given several hundred dollars to politicians in recent years. That “extra” money is now going to “preps.”

    • Garnet92 says:

      You’re right Russ, I’m an old guy, a veteran and I still get a lump in my throat when I hear (a real rendition of) the Star Spangled Banner or see the flag marched by. And I am greatly concerned that my grandchildren will know little of what America WAS.

      As you may recall (don’t know how old you are), Ronald Reagan made us proud to be Americans – in fact, there were times when George Bush did as well. Now we’ve got our Apologizer-in-Chief bad-mouthing the U.S. on the world stage. We’re in a downward spiral right now and unless we return our governance to a patriot, we’re in deep trouble.

      It’s hard for me to accept that the Establishment WANTS to lose (but I wouldn’t stake my life on it). I know that they dislike (maybe hate) conservatives, that’s pretty apparent, but I’ve always thought that their reasoning was they would lose control of their (bought and paid for) candidate if a conservative won. They’d be on the outside rather than on the inside.

      You may be right Russ, but it’s not inside of me to “take a fall” and, in effect, that’s what you believe that they’re doing. I can’t dismiss it out of hand, but that kind of “stragegery” is difficult for me to understand. Thanks for your comment!

      • Russ R says:

        Garnet, After reading your reply to me, I’m sorry I even wrote a comment. You are obviously such a good person and class act that I’m sorry I was so negative. PS I’m VERY impressed that you and the other bloggers take the time to respond to comments.

        • Garnet92 says:

          Bite your tongue Russ! Don’t be sorry to comment, we thrive on your comments and I didn’t take offense at all. Thanks for your compliments, but I’m just like you, I’ve just got a soapbox from which to speak my mind. Please continue to add your thoughts, we think that a dialogue is good for us all – no individual has all of the answers and we all learn from one another!

  6. Uriel says:

    I really think the time has come to get voting records and do due diligence. I don’t know about others but the car sales pitches have gotten old. My ears are going deaf from all the clanking and grinding. Unfortunately last presidential election, I did like many, voting Against a worst case choice. Maybe This time I will study all candidates Now and push the better choice before convention. I am not so sure Republicans are Against us as playing the worn out poker buddies cards. I Will give Jindal high marks for that as he broke up a long standing poker game and his austerity budget. They ruffled lots of feathers. My biggest beef is his absence inhouse but then look where golf ball is during different crisis times.

    • Garnet92 says:

      As I told Brian, Uriel, my friends and relatives in Louisiana have badmouthed Jindal and I didn’t (yet) get details as to why, but I do remember my son complaining that Jindal was so busy running for president, he wasn’t taking care of Louisiana’s business, so absence in the state is apparently one of their issues.

  7. upaces88 says:

    Everyone here has his number…including some of the Black Population.
    This is no secret. He wants a “3rd Term.”
    The illegals will make that happen!