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