Constitutional Speaker on KCAA Sat, Nov 26, 2011
On Saturday on Constitution Speaker Radio Travis Morgan, the author of Catch Me If You Know How, joined me. The book teaches computer forensics to all - which by the way makes this book a great Christmas Gift!After the interview, during the 5 Big Stories of the Week, I answered a question about the constitutionality of profiling.
Then we embarked on the 5 Big Stories of the Week
Honorable Mention: Supercommittee Announces No Deal
Honorable Mention: Tony Rezko Sentenced To Decade Behind Bars
1. Thanksgiving
---------------------------------------
Nuts and Nuggets - Once again, Newt Gingrich gets both the Nut and Nugget in the same sitting. . .
Nugget: In the Heritage Foundation Republican Debate last week Newt Gingrich connected when he argued that if the US were serious about the Middle East, we’d be busily opening up new oil fields and collapsing the price of oil.
Nut: We had another debate last week. Newt, out of the blue, announced his new immigration policy. Newt's position on illegal aliens was a little odd.
Newt said was that somebody that's been here 20, 25 years, not a citizen, they're illegal for 20, 25 years, they've had kids, family here, they're rooted, they're involved, they're participating here in the American system, and just to uproot them is wrong.
I get what he’s saying. But how exactly would his idea work? Are they still to be kicked out if they’ve been here one day less than his recommendation? Do they have to be able to speak English? How do we determine they have assimilated into American culture?
Has he even thought about this beyond what his heart says?
I am all for immigration, and such examples as the family here for 25 years does pose a challenge. But instead of focusing on who to deport, and who not to deport, how about we just secure the border, use E-Verify to make sure employers don’t hire illegals, and then let those that feel they need to deport themselves?
I understand what Newt's saying. I understand the thinking that went into his statement. I'm not criticizing the basic idea, but that he threw it out there without any explanation, without any parameters, basically creating a Rick Perry situation where anybody and everybody seems to have a reason to start shooting at him for it. He put it out there, and he's done it in a debate, and he will receive a lot of criticism for it from both the media, and those that are trying to get the federal government to abide by their own laws.
Note, though, that Newt did not say anything about giving them citizenship. Newt knows that if you grant amnesty, amnesty is citizenship, and Newt insists this is not amnesty because he’s not talking about making them citizens. And if they're not citizens, they can't vote.
Newt's trying to go down the humane road. Newt's saying, "I have a heart. We care about these people." But the liberals take that to mean that those against illegal immigration have no hearts.
Seems fine, doing what Newt wants, without giving them citizenship. But how long before they do become citizens? How long before concessions are made for them? I can see giving these people the right to work here, without making them legal residents. But the process of being here must start over there, where they came from, the legal way. Apply, and join our society if you can get through the process. I don't agree that we should make 11 million workers who are already here illegally legal.
Newt’s idea would simply open the door for amnesty.
Catch all of the past podcasts at KCAAradio.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment