I was able to watch most of last night’s debate. The two candidates who have had the more controversial positions on immigration are Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry. It’s worth noting that both have probably more involvement with dealing with illegal aliens than any of the other candidates; Gingrich in supporting the 1986 Reagan amnesty and Perry being the 10-year governor of Texas who helped to implement the in-state tuition granted to illegal aliens if they’ve been residents of Texas for at least 3 years.
While I believe Perry is much better on immigration and dealing with illegal aliens than what many conservatives have said about him on the issue, his “heartless” answer a few debates back was a huge mistake. During the debate last night, Gingrich mentioned he would not deport those here illegally after they’d been here for a certain length of time (25 years), but would not grant them automatic citizenship, amnesty; he also said he would be willing to take the heat for his statement.
Right away, Michelle Bachmann jumped all over Gingrich on this, saying he would allow 11 million illegal aliens (CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer mentioned there were 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S.) to remain in this country when in fact he said no such thing. Mitt Romney chimed in saying Gingrich’s plan would be a magnet for an influx of illegal aliens, similar to what happened after the Reagan amnesty. Romney’s statement ignored much of what Gingrich had just said; as President, Gingrich would not have a problem deporting those illegals who didn’t meet a certain select criteria.
There’s something else. Just as with Romney, Bachmann, Cain, and Santorum (and I believe Huntsman as well, although I haven’t confirmed it), both Gingrich and Perry stated categorically that strengthening the border must come first before dealing with what to do about the illegals already here, and any talk of comprehensive immigration reform, which must occur, has to wait until the border is more secure. For Gingrich, this is the lesson he learned following the passage of the Reagan amnesty that he supported 25 years ago, that those who support an amnesty-first approach and then strengthening the border later never get around to doing the latter. To say Gingrich supports amnesty is ridiculous; to ignore Gingrich’s approach, which is the same as the approach most every other candidate has supported, is downright dishonest.
Note: I don’t support Ron Paul. I never will support Ron Paul. While he is obviously an intelligent man, I never will take him seriously as a candidate for President. He seems to be too willing to approach many items, especially terrorism, from a position of weakness. I think we’ve had enough of that already with Barack Obama.
Cross-posted at Scipio the Metalcon.