“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

Monday, November 28, 2011

Newt's pragmatism on immigration

Newt Gingrich is taking a lot of heat from the other GOP candidates for his comments on immigration. They're accusing him of being pro-amnesty....

From NYTimes -- Mr. Gingrich responded by pressing his case that the country — and the Republican Party — would not be served by forcing the exile of immigrants who had been in the country for years, paying taxes and staying out of legal trouble.

“I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter century,” Mr. Gingrich said during the debate. “And I’m prepared to take the heat for saying let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship, but by finding a way to create legality so that they are not separated from their families.”

I think this is the most pragmatic, logical, and reasonable position. While in an ideal world, it would be nice to kick literally every illegal out of the country and start over from scratch with a closed border, in what alternative universe do these conditions exist?  The fact is, they are here, and most do not commit crimes, do pay some taxes, and do participate in the American dream. Blanket amnesty is a bad idea, but rounding up and deporting 20million people is equally bad.

There's got to be some way to offer a pathway to legality, but maybe not full voting citizenship, to those who participate and remain otherwise lawful. I think Newt's on to something and the other candidates have to attack him as the front runner.

Romney's objection that it'll just encourage more illegal border crossings could be negated by closing the border first.


Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

The question of illegal immigration aside, Gingrich ought to be laughed off the stage and made to run away in tears. The fact that he isn't suggests to me that there is no hope for America.

Here's a summary of Gingrich's family life:
1) Gingrich marries his high school teacher, Jackie, who was seven years his senior.

2) Jackie puts Gingrich through college and she works hard to get him elected to the House in 1978 (Gingrich won partly because his campaign claimed that his Democratic opponent would neglect her family if elected. At that time it was common knowledge that Gingrich was straying.)

3) Shortly after being elected, Gingrich separated from his wife, Jackie, announcing the separation in the hospital room where Jackie was recovering from cancer surgery. Jackie Gingrich and her children had to depend on alms from her church because Gingrich didn't pay any child support.

4) Six months after the divorce, Gingrich, married Marianne Ginther.

5) In May 1999, however, Gingrich called Marianne at her mother's home. After wishing the 84-year-old matriarch happy birthday, he told Marianne that he wanted a divorce. This was eight months after Marianne was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.

6) In 2000, Gingrich, 57, married ex-congressional aide Callista Bisek, 34, with whom he was having a relationship while married to Marianne.

All I can say is, Bisek better hope that she does not contract a chronic disease.

Ed said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ed said...

Isaac, I lived next door to the Gingrich's in Carrollton, Georgia and was friends with his daughters growing up. My family worked tirelessly on his first campaign.

I heard his daughter Jackie say in an interview recently that her father's serving her mother on her death bed with divorce papers was a complete myth. They had decided to divorce months before that. Your information seems to be incorrect.

That said, I don't approve of Newt's infidelity any more than you do, but compared to Clinton, Newt is a choir boy. The ship of self-righteous indignation over marital infidelity of politicians has already sailed in this country. Get over it.

The only question really is, can Gingrich beat Obama and does he have a good economic plan for the country. I care about little else because it doesn't affect me.

Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

Ed, would you like a bowl of this tasty soup I have made. It is chock full of tasty, ripe vegetables, fresh beef, and flavorful spices and has been simmered to the peak of perfection.

That turd floating on top? Oh, pay no attention to that. Everything else is just wonderful.

You'll pass? I don't blame you.

However nice Gingrich soup might be otherwise, it has a big fat turd floating on the top. No thanks. I'll pass on it, too.

Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

BTW, Ed, what is TRR's position on Alvin and Heidi Toffler's Third Wave ("Creating a New Civilization, the Politics of the Third Wave"), which Gingrich so enthusiastically endorses (e.g., the marginalization of Christianity and the end of Christian morality, the demise of the American Constitution, the erasing of all national borders, and the institution of global totalitarian rule)?

Ed said...

I read some Toffler years ago so I'm not fluent enough to argue with you on that. But Newt's stated beliefs are in direct opposition to each and every one of those you listed above. Where do you get your info?

Don't constru my defense of Newt's postions as an endorsement of his candidacy. Honestly, I wonder about his political trustworthiness, but I do like what he's saying right now.

david said...

Yes, I am uncertain if I can support him. The rallying cry seems to be defeat Obama. And while I tend to agree with this what does this say about our choices of a quality candidate? It seems we've gone beyond picking the lessor of two evils into some yet-to-be-named lowest common denominator electoral strategy. This is no way to run a country.

We should demand better.

Ed said...

This is why Christie should have run. Other than him, who?

Isaac A. Nussbaum said...

What a greasy puke Gingrich is!

In 1980 Alvin Toffler wrote the book "Third Wave." While Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich endorsed the book, and put it on his congressional recommended reading list. He liked it so much, that in 1996 he wrote the forward to it's sequel "The Politics of the Third Wave."

The premise of both books is that national sovereignty is an outdated concept. The books call for the complete repeal of the US constitution. It envisions a world wide technocracy run by multi-national corporations and NGOs.

When Gingrich was presented with a copy of "The Politics of the Third Wave" and asked to sign his forward, he was quite surprised. He signed it, but declared that "I disagree with half of what is in the book."

source: www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-charleston-sc/newt-gingrich-denies-his-own-book-at-charleston-campaign-event