As I pointed out, only fools believe that what he has espoused about allowing some illegals to stay is not amnesty  And even Newt has bought his own pathetic excuse.  But the problem with having a long track record is that said track record comes back to bite said someone in the ass when they lie.

Michele Bachmann is taking the fight to Newt over his cries of how he doesn’t support amnesty even though he has come out and said nothing short of such.  In 2004 Newt also pimped amnesty and ”paths to permanent residence to enable more workers to stay, assimilate, and become part of America.”  He justified lawlessness on behalf of illegals saying “those already working here outside the law are unlikely to leave.”

Yeah, well bank robbers who are not punished are unlikely to stop robbing banks too.  So that is about the dumbest, non-conservative excuse for promoting law breaking one can come up with. So if you want amnesty for illegals and convince millions more to come here in the future illegally waiting for the next amnesty and perpetuate the cycle then Newt is you guy.  If you actually believe in holding criminals to account he is not.

Let us though establish the facts.  Entering the United States illegally is a crime.  Not only is it a crime, but it carries a variety of penalties including imprisonment.  Thus, upon entering the United States illegally, one has committed a crime.  Furthermore, anyone saying that an illegal alien that has committed no crime should be allowed to stay in the United States is engaged in an oxymoronic statement since the act of illegally entering the United States is defined as a crime.  Thus, all illegal aliens are criminals from the get go and not eligible under the standards of said loony people.

Ok, now that the basics are out of the way, back to Newt.  Newt says that he wants to allow illegal aliens who have spent a certain amount of time in the country (say 25 years or so) and who have obeyed the law and paid taxes as wells as have roots to the country (i.e. family, etc.) should be given consideration to stay, not as citizens, but as resident aliens of some status.

However, again, Newt’s plan hits several logical snags.  First, by virtue of being here illegally all those illegal aliens, regardless of time spent in country or attachment to the society, have committed at least a single crime by having come here illegally in the first place.  They would therefore be ineligible on the fact that they had already broken immigration law.  Secondly, it would be impossible for an illegal alien to pay taxes to the federal government without a Social Security number unless they had committed an act of fraud, also a crime, to obtain one.  Thirdly, whether or not someone has ties to the community such as having a family is not a valid excuse to not be punished under the law.  Bank robbers do not get to go free because they have a young child at home and a wife that needs him to support her, for example.

In the end, after a critical examination to Newt’s proposal, what we have here is Newt offering “amnesty” to these illegals for their multiple crimes which they would have had to of committed just to qualify for his proposal.  Newt of course claims that his plan is not “amnesty”.  But it is.  Amnesty is defined as, “the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals”.

You can slice it and spin it anyway you want.  It is indeed amnesty by the actual definition of the term.

Of course Newt’s bizarre, anti-law approach to illegal immigration is nothing new.  He has held this position for years and promoted it proudly.  He has far too much compassion for those that break the law and that is not a conservative value.  Of course Newt’s “conservativeness” has long been flawed to anyone that has followed his career.  And conservatives would do a great disservice to this nation if they were to nominate him for the Presidency.

Newt is doing right now what he always does when he is caught being the technocratic liberal that he is.  He is spinning.  He is claiming that people do not understand his position which makes no sense to anyone but himself.  And hopefully all this idiocy will drag him down.  Sure, he might be “better than Obama”.  But so would a rock.

And you give me the choice between Gingrich and a rock and I will pick the rock.

“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 which have been here a quarter-century. And I am prepared to take the heat for saying, let’s be humane in enforcing the law without giving them citizenship, but finding a way to give them legality so as not to separate them from their families.” – Newt Gingrich

Ah there’s the “compassionate” conservative Gingrich that drove conservatives nuts during the 1990′s raising his head again. Just remember, this is who he is. You vote for him, you will get all sorts of wonky, touchy feely non solutions that will just allow problems to continue.

“So you would have students in this room deported?” asked the teacher.

The panelist replied, “Yes, I would if they were illegal. You bet.”

Rodriguez also told the teacher if the person is here illegally, they are breaking the law.

“You know what I would have? I would have you teach more balanced – conservative,” added Rodriguez.

After those remarks is when the teacher made the Nazi comment saying, “You can just say what you are – a Nazi.”

source

Of course the teacher, unnamed, and of course the teacher, who is obviously a few bricks shy of a load, is not going to face any disciplinary action. And why should the teacher? He or she is just saying what the NEA already believes anyway.

If I were in this district I would not want someone so utterly devoid of reality teaching my children.

Oh, and of course he was driving drunk.

This all leads to some serious questions. First, how many of Obama’s relatives are in this country exactly. Second, are any of them here legally? Third, who has been helping them to hide in plain sight and help them perpetrate their crimes?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Picture a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off; that’s the liberal power structure right now. They are banging off walls and in a panic not realizing that their fate, baring some grand scam of an October Surprise, is sealed.

When liberals are in this type of situation they revert to their old, tattered play book. They scare old people over Social Security (which they ruined faster than it was set to ruin itself through simple economics), they scare the poor over Welfare (which was never Constitutional and unsustainable), and they turn to the immigration issue.

Yes, President Obama’s minions are on the march and they are targeting Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a folk hero to Americans who actually understand why illegal immigration is bad and why illegal immigrants need to be rounded up. On Thursday the U.S. Justice Department filed suit against Sheriff Joe claiming, as the Associated Press reports:
Arpaio and his office’s defiance “unprecedented,” and said the federal government has been trying since March 2009 to get officials to comply with its probe of alleged discrimination, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and having English-only policies in his jails that discriminates against people with limited English skills.

Let’s get everything sorted out here. Black Panthers threatening voters at the polls = OK. Taking care of illegal immigrants = NOT OK. Got it.

The Obama White House and Sheriff Joe have been clashing since the President assumed the office. In 2009 the government took away Arpaio’s power to enforce federal immigration law. But Sheriff Joe kept on going under Arizona laws. This defiance of the ruling elites in Washington has lead to this latest action.
The Obama Administration is not amused by Sheriff Joe who has proven very effective in dealing with not only illegal aliens but also criminals of all flavors. From pink underwear to pedal bikes to generate electricity for television viewing, Sheriff Joe has opened what liberal panty wastes would consider a torturous “House of Horrors!”

Sheriff Joe is of course someone who understands that if you are looking for illegals you go where the illegals are. That would be mostly Latino neighborhoods because, DUH, in Arizona most illegals are Hispanics. His department regularly sweeps these areas and actually turns up more illegal aliens than more PC jurisdictions by a wide margin. Go figure huh?

Certainly the supporters of illegal aliens are upset over this. But that is just tough cookies for them.
The Justice Department is fishing for a scalp here because they have been sent on that expedition by an administration that needs to get their standard voting block riled up before a tsunami sweeps over the land in a few weeks. And they are hoping that trying to take on Sheriff Joe will get feet to the polls.

Mr. Arpaio however has proven very resilient over the years. He has been attack and battered by the left for quite a while and is still standing. Hopefully he will be just as strong against the big dog of Obama who is now throwing his weight around to try and topple him from his perch.

If you are not a liberal the following traits would be included:

green skin
male
silver eyes
7’4″ tall
275 lbs

You would, as a non-liberal, do this because it gives an accurate description of the perp and allow you to focus on a smaller set of suspects than if you were a liberal and started ignoring certain physical traits of the perp just so you did not offend anyone. In fact, as a non-liberal, you would probably find your perp very quickly by giving an accurate description as the one above because there are probably very few green skinned, 7’4″ tall males weighing 275 lbs with silver eyes out there. You also, as a non-liberal, would not want to be rounding up people needlessly and harassing obviously innocent citizens who did not have these traits just for the sake of political correctness because the NAAGP (the National Association for the Advancement of Green-skinned Peoples) might raise a stink. Yes, you might round up two or three such persons and obviously only one of them is guilty of the crime but it sure beats rounding up 100′s or even 1000′s of suspects because you want to ignore the obvious.

For liberals however noting that the suspect has green skin would be considered racial profiling. Considering that the suspect is male might then, I suppose also be considered gender profiling. Taking into account the suspects height and weight would also be considered some sort of profiling as well. Heck, even the bizarre color of this suspect’s eyes might fit under some ethnic or medical condition profiling as well.

Liberals talk about how racial profiling is wrong. But when you have an accurate description of a suspect shouldn’t all information about the suspect be given? The information is not bad. It is just information. Some people may abuse that information but that is not the fault of the information is it?

But for someone reason liberals have a phobia about admitting that in border states a lot of illegal immigrants are some flavor of Hispanic. We are, for some strange reason, not allowed to discuss that fact when dealing with the issue of illegal immigration and law enforcement officials are castigated if they even hint at the fact that when looking for illegals in certain regions they take a much more critical look at people who look to be from south of the border.

It is like the police ignoring that the suspect in my example above was a green skinned man.

In other areas of the country illegal immigrants are not as largely Hispanic as they are in some. In some regions illegal immigrants are majority Chinese while in others they are mostly Russian (that would be white skinned people just so we are clear) as just two examples. In those regions officials are just as right to use those traits to target and find illegal aliens as they are to consider that in some other places Hispanics are the majority of illegal aliens. The police do not, of course have the right to stop everyone that speaks a certain language or looks a certain way and question them and they do not do this. They must have other evidence to go on. But to ignore obvious physical traits for a suspect once that person has given an indication that they are a suspect would be asinine.

It sure would not be fair, if like mentioned above, we at the behest of liberals had to omit the fact that our perp was green and set about to round up a group of black, white and Asian men just to feel good about our selves would it? No, because that would waste valuable resources and ignore the obvious.

Her name is Peggy West, a Wisconsin Democrat, who is seen here making the argument, with a straight face, that there is something wrong with Arizona for passing its own immigration law because … wait for it … Arizona doesn’t border Mexico like other states such as Texas!

No joke, watch:

Seems to me that Ms. West should return to school and give up her office until she at least graduates with a passing grade in geography. And if, by chance she already has, then she should demand a refund because the product she received was obviously defective, should find another school with competent teachers, and graduate from there just to make sure she is well enough versed in such topics.

Honestly, who doesn’t know that Arizona borders Mexico? It is all over the news and you have to be an utter dunce to not know it if you are an adult.

The good news? Ms. West in her ignorance actually makes the case that Arizona has a right to do what they did even though she was trying to argue the opposite. Because Arizona is on the border like Texas (her example) then all is good with the law.  Not what she wanted to say but ultimately what she did say.  Hey, liberals always seem to stumble on to the truth.  The question is now will she accept delivery?

Apparently Mr. Huereka was caught in 2009 smuggling illegals across the border according to a FOX News reportbased on sources. Gee, hmmmm, perhaps if he had been put in Sheriff Joe’s cozy little prison for 5-10 years instead of released he might still be alive today?

Of course many Mexicans are outraged at the “boy’s” death. They aren’t so outraged that they are willing to stop entering the United Illegally and putting themselves in danger and they aren’t so outraged that they condemned the attack on our Border Patrol Agents … but that is to be expected from a society where so many seem to think they have a right to enter this country any time, any way and do anything once they get here.

How spare me your fake out rage, those of you who think that unnecessary force was used. Guns against rocks you cry? Ever been hit in the head with a rock half the size of a baseball? I have. It hurts and it leaves a welt and a mark. Ever hear of being stoned to death? So yes, these officers were completely justified in their actions despite your frail sensitivities.

Maybe it is time we stop letting criminals go and putting them into prison and to work here to pay for their crimes? Two things would happen if we did. First, there would be a lot less people coming here illegally. Secondly there would be a lot less scumbags getting shot after assaulting our Border Agents.