Neocons Cry For Full-blown Amnesty After Their Failed Policies Backfire Nationallly

[Brian4Liberty]

There was some neo-conservative on the radio yesterday that said that "we" can work with Obama if Obama keeps his campaign promise. Apparently Obama had said at some point during the campaign that he supported increased military spending? So there's the bottom line. If Obama keeps up the eternal wars, they are happy. No real differences between them and the Democrats. These guys are nothing but big givernment, big spending, Mommy/Daddy government, dollar destroying socialists who love war.

When will the rank and file GOP realize that they have been infiltrated and taken over by these communists?

 

[sailingaway]

they are trying to say that is why they didn't win. What they are really trying to do is keep NEOCONS in power, who are bleeding support, not the Republican party. Being liberals, throwing free money stolen from others at people who desperately need it and buying their votes is 'the way' to keep power, to NEOconservatives. Ron's message does well with free people of every color. this is just their excuse so it isn't their fault. so why did the candidates backed by Rove and the neocons IN PARTICULAR lose 100% of their races?

I mean, literally 100% of their races.

Note 8 of 12 candidates Ron backed won.

 

[AuH20]

Liberty, private property rights and economic self-determination VS. "Gimme Free Stuff Gringo." I don't like our odds. Abstract concepts usually don't defeat the wants of an empty stomach.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Neocons have always advocated for amnesty. This is them not letting a crisis go to waste.

Cheap labor for their cronies, another 'excuse' for higher deficits...................The neos love it. They want to bring in an eternal slave class to do their laundry, cook their meals, wash their cars, and groom their lawns. Meanwhile, folks like you and me are stuck with the residual bill.

You must understand that the neos could care less that the waves of immigrants are not learning english, because this key fundamental of upward economic mobility is not of their concern. They want dumbed down, dependent servants. The Neos have always been modern-day aristocrats.

Truth.

 

[angelatc]

Cheap labor for their cronies, another 'excuse' for higher deficits...................The neos love it. They want to bring in an eternal slave class to do their laundry, cook their meals, wash their cars, and groom their lawns. Meanwhile, folks like you and me are stuck with the residual bill.

You must understand that the neos could care less that the waves of immigrants are not learning english, because this key fundamental of upward economic mobility is not of their concern. They want dumbed down, dependent servants. The Neos have always been modern-day aristocrats.

Absolutely. I switched position on open borders when I saw that the corporate government was allowing unfettered immigration for no other reason than to drive wages down. You can't have a welfare state along with open borders.

You're old enough - you saw it at the end of the 90's. There was a labor shortage, which meant that wages were rising. Women I worked with were leaving the work force to stay home with their kids. Fast food restaurants were on the verge of closing because they couldn't attract help at minimum wage. So instead of revamping policy to compensate for the boom, they allowed corporate America to import slave labor.

You also can't make deals with Democrats that entail the cheap imported people won't get benefits. They lie.

 

[Philhelm]

I wonder if it's possible to grant amnesty to any immigrant if they agree to forego any sort of governmental assistance?

No welfare.
No health care.
No educational assistance.
Social Security and Medicare only upon retirement and at 1/3 normal rates.

Do you think they'd go for it? I'm just spit-balling, but it sounds like a solution that could work. We'd get the right kind of immigrants and they'd get citizenship without fear of deportation. And their families would be Americans.

At least as of now, any U.S. citizen that petitions for an immigrant (spouse, family member, etc.) is required to sing an Affidavit of Support. That means if the immigrant ends up on any means-tested government assistance, the petitioner will be required to foot the bill.

 

[georgiaboy]

Like I said in another thread, politically it brings the party exactly zero voters.

Ha! Exactly! In fact, it's a net negative for the GOP.

I distinctly remember all the conservative talkers pounding on this during the big amnesty bill debate. "This is a ploy by the Democrats to get 14 Million new voters!"

This election was about conservatives not showing up because there were no conservative candidates to vote for, plain and simple.

 

[erowe1]

We need to capitalize on this.

Show voters Ron Paul's NumbersUSA grades to voters who care about immigration, and show them how, while every other Republican was pandering to Tom Tancredo's supporters, he just kept standing for freedom for all.

While the party is tacking this direction and that direction trying to get voters, they end up where Ron Paul was all along.

 

[angelatc]

I would bend in immigration if it was part of a deal for something like, say, opting out of Social Security. What say ye?

 

[AuH20]

I would bend in immigration if it was part of a deal for something like, say, opting out of Social Security. What say ye?

You are bought cheap. A flat tax of 20% and a consitutional amendment prohibiting property taxes.

 

[angelatc]

You are bought cheap. A flat tax of 20% and a consitutional amendment prohibiting property taxes.

Cool. It's nice to know we're not inflexible.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

You are bought cheap. A flat tax of 20% and a consitutional amendment prohibiting property taxes.

You seriously want to tax people at 20%, with no exceptions?

Why are you even here?

 

[AuH20]

You seriously want to tax people at 20%, with no exceptions?

Why are you even here?

A flat tax of 20% would be a welcome change to what we are currently saddled with, which is basically selective punishment. In a perfect world, I'd rather not pay an taxes. The prohibition of property taxes would free up much needed discretionary income.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

A flat tax of 20% would be a welcome change to what we are currently saddled with, which is basically selective punishment. In a perfect world, I'd rather not pay an taxes. The prohibition of property taxes would free up much needed discretionary income.

That selective punishment has brought us to a point where nearly half of our population isn't paying income taxes. The goal should be to make that group bigger, not eliminate it entirely. The answer to partial slavery is not full slavery.

 

[torchbearer]

Or crash the welfare system by allowing amnesty at the same time? Just a thought.

yeah, let's crank up the heat.
if we keep slow-boiling this frog, its going to die.

 

[AuH20]

That selective punishment has brought us to a point where nearly half of our population isn't paying income taxes. The goal should be to make that group bigger, not eliminate it entirely. The answer to partial slavery is not full slavery.

Agreed. But there are large obstacles in our way. Many have been brainwashed into this idea that taxes are a patriotic responsibility and number two, the more fortunate are obligated to bear a siazble share of the costs. So we are forced to walk this back piece by piece.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Ron Paul on Amnesty:

Q: Please start by summarizing your position on immigration.

Well, I start off with saying that it's a big problem. I don't like to get involved with the Federal Government very much, but I do think it is a federal responsibility to protect our borders. This mess has come about for various reasons. One, the laws aren't enforced. Another, the welfare state. We have a need for workers in this country because our welfare system literally encourages people not to work. Therefore, a lot of jobs go begging. This is an incentive for immigrants to come in and take those jobs.

It is compounded because of federal mandates on the states to provide free medical care—that's literally bankrupting the hospitals in Texas—and free education.

So my main point is to get rid of incentives that cause people to break the law—entitlements as well as the promise of amnesty, citizenship.

I also want to revisit the whole idea of birthright citizenship. I don't think many countries have that. I don't think it was the intention of the Fourteenth Amendment. I personally think it could be fixed by legislation. But some people argue otherwise, so I've covered myself by introducing a constitutional amendment.

Q: How would legislation work?

It would define citizenship. Individuals that just stepped over the border illegally would not be technically "under the jurisdiction of the United States". [i.e. not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," in the words of the Fourteenth Amendment] That's illegal entry, so they don't deserve this privilege.

Q: What is your view on legal immigration?

I think it depends on our economy. If we have a healthy economy, I think we could be very generous on work programs. People come in, fulfill their role and go back home.

I'm not worried about legal immigration. I think we would even have more if we had a healthy economy.

But in the meantime, we want to stop the illegals. And that's why I don't think our border guards should be sent to Iraq, like we've done. I think we need more border guards. But to have the money and the personnel, we have to bring our troops home from Iraq.

Q: Is the economy healthy enough right now?

No. I don't think so. I think the economy is going downhill. People are feeling pinched—in the middle, much more pinched than the government is willing to admit. Their standard of living is going down. I saw a clip on TV the other day about somebody who was about to lose their house, they couldn't pay their mortgage. There're millions of people involved, people are very uncertain about this housing market. That can't be separated from concern about illegals.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/ron-paul-i-believe-in-national-sovereignty

 

[kathy88]

I've heard some saying they should become Pro-choice too. I actually feel sorry for how delusional they are.

I am so sick to death of this issue. It has NO place in Federal Government whatsoever. This single issue decides so many votes it's disgusting.

 

[erowe1]

Ron Paul on Amnesty:

Notice that he defines amnesty as citizenship. I haven't read all the quotes in the OP, but Krauthammer's, for example, is explicitly for something that comes short of citizenship.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Notice that he defines amnesty as citizenship. I haven't read all the quotes in the OP, but Krauthammer's, for example, is explicitly for something that comes short of citizenship.

He also discusses work programs (visas) and border protection. So people who come here to work would need to have the proper visas.

Q: What is your view on legal immigration?

I think it depends on our economy. If we have a healthy economy, I think we could be very generous on work programs. People come in, fulfill their role and go back home.

I'm not worried about legal immigration. I think we would even have more if we had a healthy economy.

But in the meantime, we want to stop the illegals. And that's why I don't think our border guards should be sent to Iraq, like we've done. I think we need more border guards. But to have the money and the personnel, we have to bring our troops home from Iraq.