Cruz has changed his stance on immigration

LisaC

LisaC

I'm here to spin the moral compass.
In January, Cruz said: "I don't intend to send jackboots to knock on your door and every door in America. That's not how we enforce the law for any crime," Cruz told Tapper. "We don't live in a police state. We do have law enforcement."

In February, Cruz said: Bill O'Reilly, who asked Cruz, "Would you go look for them, though? As (Donald) Trump would look for them to get them out, would you do that if you were president?" "Bill, of course you would, that's what ICE exists for," Cruz said. "We have law enforcement that looks for people who are violating the laws, that apprehends them and deports them." O'Reilly offered a hypothetical example of an immigrant from Ireland with "a couple of kids and he's settled into Long Island." "And you, President Cruz, are going to send the feds to his house, take him out, and put him on a plane back to Ireland?" O'Reilly asked. "You better believe it," Cruz said.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/politics/ted-cruz-illegal-immigrants-bill-oreilly/index.html
 
They have all strengthened their stance in response to the finger in the wind test, but Cruz has been the most consistent. He has never called for a path to citizenship, has been against anchor babies, but acknowledges that a Constitutional amendment may be required to fix that, has always been for some form of deportation of existing illegals, and has always been for strengthening border defenses first. Rubio has flip-flopped from the Gang of 8 stance which closely mirrored failed policies of the Reagan and Bush administrations, to now being a supporter of strong punitive reforms. Trump is an idiot who has no stance and has said any damn thing that pops into his head, from giving them citizenship to jailing them.

Truth be told, no immigration policy of any kind is enforceable unless we get control of our borders. Whatever immigration laws we currently create are so easily broken as to make them laughable.
 
lotstodo said:
They have all strengthened their stance in response to the finger in the wind test, but Cruz has been the most consistent. He has never called for a path to citizenship, has been against anchor babies, but acknowledges that a Constitutional amendment may be required to fix that, has always been for some form of deportation of existing illegals, and has always been for strengthening border defenses first. Rubio has flip-flopped from the Gang of 8 stance which closely mirrored failed policies of the Reagan and Bush administrations, to now being a supporter of strong punitive reforms. Trump is an idiot who has no stance and has said any damn thing that pops into his head, from giving them citizenship to jailing them.

Truth be told, no immigration policy of any kind is enforceable unless we get control of our borders. Whatever immigration laws we currently create are so easily broken as to make them laughable.
Click to expand...
Yup. :cool2:
 
Truth is, no president, not even blowhard Trump, is going to round them all up. It simply isn't feasible from a cost or logistics standpoint. The best we can realistically do is to improve on catching them through employment or from criminal or traffic instances. Those should be deported, if not incarcerated.

Even if we could magically make them all disappear, there would be a negative impact on our economy from it. None of us want to admit that, but it's true.

But as LTD stated; all that is just farting into the wind until we secure the borders and cut off the gravy train. If we did all that and did a better job of sending back the ones tangling with the law; the immigration issue would mostly work itself out after a few years.
 
There's no need to "Look" for them. They pop up in most traffic stops, road blocks and domestic calls. I was doing a "drug talk" for parents at a middle school in the early 90's. When it came to the question and answer segment, a parent asked me if it was true that some cops have to plant drugs to arrest people. First, a Donald Trump response....HOW STUPID ARE YOU....REALLY?

Although I didn't respond that way, I told the parent that there are SO MANY legitimate drug cases to make, there is absolutely no need to fabricate one. Same with the immigration problem. We all know there are many immigrants who do not violate the law, but are here illegally. Then there are plenty who DO violate the law. Who would we rather deport first? Of course, those who are criminals. Heck, they prioritize themselves and do the work for us. They are the ones who will draw the attention of law enforcement first. They will be the ones who are DUI, involved in thefts and domestic violence. When they are arrested and identified as being here illegally, they get shipped out.

This issue is not all that complicated. It took decades for them to get here and it may take a decade to get them out. In the mean time, those who are hard working and law abiding may be able to stay longer than those who are not. It's not rocket science at all.
 
Grey Colson said:
There's no need to "Look" for them. They pop up in most traffic stops, road blocks and domestic calls. I was doing a "drug talk" for parents at a middle school in the early 90's. When it came to the question and answer segment, a parent asked me if it was true that come cops have to plant drugs to arrest people. First, a Donald Trump response....HOW STUPID ARE YOU....REALLY?

Although I didn't respond that way, I told the parent that there are SO MANY legitimate drug cases to make, there is absolutely no need to fabricate one. Same with the immigration problem. We all know there are many immigrants who do not violate the law, but are here illegally. Then there are plenty who DO violate the law. Who would we rather deport first? Of course, those who are criminals. Heck, they prioritize themselves and do the work for us. They are the ones who will draw the attention of law enforcement first. They will be the ones who are DUI, involved in thefts and domestic violence. When they are arrested and identified as being here illegally, they get shipped out.

This issue is not all that complicated. It took decades for them to get here and it may take a decade to get them out. In the mean time, those who are hard working and law abiding may be able to stay longer than those who are not. It's not rocket science at all.
Click to expand...
Exactly!! This would work itself out in a few years if we begin by closing the boarder and cutting off the freebies, then start playing deportation Whack-a-mole with the bad eggs.

But it's an exercise in futility until we close the boarder and stop giving away the farm to them.
 
Grey Colson said:
There's no need to "Look" for them. They pop up in most traffic stops, road blocks and domestic calls. I was doing a "drug talk" for parents at a middle school in the early 90's. When it came to the question and answer segment, a parent asked me if it was true that some cops have to plant drugs to arrest people. First, a Donald Trump response....HOW STUPID ARE YOU....REALLY?

Although I didn't respond that way, I told the parent that there are SO MANY legitimate drug cases to make, there is absolutely no need to fabricate one. Same with the immigration problem. We all know there are many immigrants who do not violate the law, but are here illegally. Then there are plenty who DO violate the law. Who would we rather deport first? Of course, those who are criminals. Heck, they prioritize themselves and do the work for us. They are the ones who will draw the attention of law enforcement first. They will be the ones who are DUI, involved in thefts and domestic violence. When they are arrested and identified as being here illegally, they get shipped out.

This issue is not all that complicated. It took decades for them to get here and it may take a decade to get them out. In the mean time, those who are hard working and law abiding may be able to stay longer than those who are not. It's not rocket science at all.
Click to expand...
You pay your money and you take your chances. If you come here illegally, you have to be made aware that you can lose as well as win. Close the borders, formulate an immigration policy that helps the US and our people, prosecute and/or expel lawbreakers when they are uncovered. Some will of course live out their entire lives in secrecy and without running afoul of the law. I can probably live with that if I am reasonably assured that we have stemmed the flow illegal immigration. I may even be able to live with the fact that their progeny are US citizens. That bridge however, is way way off in the distance. No border, no talk about what to do with those who are already here beyond deporting them when they are found.
 
Grey Colson said:
There's no need to "Look" for them. They pop up in most traffic stops, road blocks and domestic calls. I was doing a "drug talk" for parents at a middle school in the early 90's. When it came to the question and answer segment, a parent asked me if it was true that some cops have to plant drugs to arrest people. First, a Donald Trump response....HOW STUPID ARE YOU....REALLY?

Although I didn't respond that way, I told the parent that there are SO MANY legitimate drug cases to make, there is absolutely no need to fabricate one. Same with the immigration problem. We all know there are many immigrants who do not violate the law, but are here illegally. Then there are plenty who DO violate the law. Who would we rather deport first? Of course, those who are criminals. Heck, they prioritize themselves and do the work for us. They are the ones who will draw the attention of law enforcement first. They will be the ones who are DUI, involved in thefts and domestic violence. When they are arrested and identified as being here illegally, they get shipped out.

This issue is not all that complicated. It took decades for them to get here and it may take a decade to get them out. In the mean time, those who are hard working and law abiding may be able to stay longer than those who are not. It's not rocket science at all.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. Back in the day, if we pulled someone over and they didn't speak any English, didn't have documentation to show they were in the country legally; we would take them to jail and call immigration who would come and pick them up. This is the process Cruz is talking about. If you go back to 1952, you will see how Eisenhower dealt with illegal immigration with an operation called "Operation Wetback."

When illegals were identified, they were put into a detention facility and then shipped back to Mexico by ship or plane. The operation was very successful resulting in less than a third being deported by the government and the remainder self-deporting. Legislation was passed that also fined employers who employed illegals. Those fines were $200 per illegal for the first offense, $300 second offense, and $1,000 for the third offense. In today's dollars those fines equal $1,784; $2,677; and $8,925. The fines enacted in 1952 have never been increased.

I keep saying we should be enforcing the immigration laws we currently have plus impose much higher fines that will have an adverse financial impact on those employers who employ illegals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top