Dustin Siggins:
"Last evening conservative favorite Ted Cruz, the insurgent candidate in the Republican Texas Senate Primary who is closing the gap as we hit less than two weeks from primary voting day, gave me 15 minutes of his time for a few questions about taxes, term limits, immigration and Sarah Palin’s endorsement. Below is our conversation.
Dustin Siggins (DS): 12 days out, you’re closing in the polls, Sarah Palin endorsed you…what are your thoughts on how things are going?
Ted Cruz (TC): The campaign is going extraordinarily well. The momentum is off the charts. Sarah Palin endorsed us last week and we had a thousand contributions come in within 48 hours. We have conservatives of all stripes backing us: grassroots leaders, Republican women – everyone is coalescing behind our campaign.
DS: In a recent interview with Kathleen McKinley at Smart Girl Nation (transcript posted at RightWingNews.com), you said you opposed Democratic amnesty proposals as well as “Democrat-lite” proposals from Republicans. Can you elaborate upon this a bit?
TC: We have a crisis on illegal immigration. Neither party is serious about stopping it. I strongly oppose illegal immigration. I categorically oppose amnesty. I support legal immigrants who come here supporting the American Dream.
I come from the perspective of someone who spent much of my adult life in law enforcement. In a post-9/11 world, it is absolutely unacceptable that we don’t know who comes over our borders. We need to do everything humanly possible to secure the borders. Electronic surveillance, a wall, helicopters and, most importantly, boots on the ground. If elected, the first thing I will do is triple the U.S. Border Patrol.
We should celebrate legal immigrants. No matter the party or the politician, I oppose amnesty. Amnesty is contrary to the rule of law and is unfair to legal immigrants who wait years or decades to come here legally.
When it comes to illegal immigration, conservatives often feel like Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football. The 1986 amnesty was allegedly to secure borders in exchange for amnesty, but the borders were never secured. We should not fall for that again.
A better immigration system is both possible and simple. First, we enforce the law – securing the borders will stop the inflow. Second, put in place a strong E-Verify program. The lack of jobs will dry up the magnet for being here and illegal immigrants will leave. America MUST remain a nation of the rule of law, and non-enforcement of illegal immigration undermines that....." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Showing posts with label secure the border. Show all posts
Showing posts with label secure the border. Show all posts
April 27, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Town Hall "Voters Understand the Immigration Debate; Politicians Don't"
Very, very well said by Scott Rasmussen:
"..On the issues before the court, most voters tend to side with the state of Arizona rather than the federal government. Fifty-nine percent of voters nationwide, for example, agree with one of the law's most controversial provisions, that police officers should routinely check the immigration status of those they pull over for other violations. Most voters would like to have a law like Arizona's in their own state.
But that says more about voter respect for the law than it does about the immigration issue. Voters figure if there's a law on the books, the government should enforce it.
That's why, among voters who are angry about the immigration issue, 83 percent are angry at the federal government rather than the illegal immigrants themselves. It's also why two-thirds of voters think those who knowingly hire illegal immigrants are a bigger problem than the people they employ. Simply put, most Americans are angry at those who would entice others to break the law. They're not angry at people who are willing to work hard to provide for their families.
It's a little bit like the public desire to go after drug pushers rather than occasional users of illegal drugs.
Still, there's another reason for the disconnect between official Washington and the American people on immigration.
In Washington, the entire focus of the immigration debate is on how to deal with those already living here illegally. For voters, this is a secondary concern. The bigger concern is how to secure the border so future immigrants enter the county according to the rules. Routinely, in surveys for years, 60 percent or more of voters say securing the borders is a higher priority than legalizing the status of the illegal immigrants who are here now.
Once voters are convinced that illegal immigration is a thing of the past, it will be easier to address the status of those in the country already.
But voters don't believe the federal government has any interest in securing the border. In fact, most believe the policies of the federal government are designed to encourage illegal immigration. This offends voters who want to respect the rule of law. If immigration laws -- or any laws -- are routinely ignored, then the government loses credibility.
If the laws are enforced, 61 percent of voters favor a welcoming policy that lets anybody come to America except national security threats, criminals and those who would live off the U.S. welfare system. All who would like to work hard and pursue the American Dream are welcome.
The bottom line is that voters remember what many in Washington often forget: America is a nation of immigrants -- and of laws. The American people want both traditions to be honored...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"..On the issues before the court, most voters tend to side with the state of Arizona rather than the federal government. Fifty-nine percent of voters nationwide, for example, agree with one of the law's most controversial provisions, that police officers should routinely check the immigration status of those they pull over for other violations. Most voters would like to have a law like Arizona's in their own state.
But that says more about voter respect for the law than it does about the immigration issue. Voters figure if there's a law on the books, the government should enforce it.
That's why, among voters who are angry about the immigration issue, 83 percent are angry at the federal government rather than the illegal immigrants themselves. It's also why two-thirds of voters think those who knowingly hire illegal immigrants are a bigger problem than the people they employ. Simply put, most Americans are angry at those who would entice others to break the law. They're not angry at people who are willing to work hard to provide for their families.
It's a little bit like the public desire to go after drug pushers rather than occasional users of illegal drugs.
Still, there's another reason for the disconnect between official Washington and the American people on immigration.
In Washington, the entire focus of the immigration debate is on how to deal with those already living here illegally. For voters, this is a secondary concern. The bigger concern is how to secure the border so future immigrants enter the county according to the rules. Routinely, in surveys for years, 60 percent or more of voters say securing the borders is a higher priority than legalizing the status of the illegal immigrants who are here now.
Once voters are convinced that illegal immigration is a thing of the past, it will be easier to address the status of those in the country already.
But voters don't believe the federal government has any interest in securing the border. In fact, most believe the policies of the federal government are designed to encourage illegal immigration. This offends voters who want to respect the rule of law. If immigration laws -- or any laws -- are routinely ignored, then the government loses credibility.
If the laws are enforced, 61 percent of voters favor a welcoming policy that lets anybody come to America except national security threats, criminals and those who would live off the U.S. welfare system. All who would like to work hard and pursue the American Dream are welcome.
The bottom line is that voters remember what many in Washington often forget: America is a nation of immigrants -- and of laws. The American people want both traditions to be honored...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 24, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Town Hall/Chuck Norris "Soros and Obama vs. Sheriff Joe Arpaio"
Chuck Norris:
"...Of course, if you mention the term sheriff at the moment, most thoughts go racing to Arizona and Maricopa County's 20-year sheriff, Joe Arpaio, and his plight with the feds and fight against illegal immigration.
Regardless of the fact that there are a plethora of amazing sheriffs across the country doing incredible work subduing lawbreakers and keeping their counties clean of mischief, the mainstream media, or MSM, are working double time with the federal government to make sure that when you think of sheriffs, the picture painted in your mind is one of runaway renegades -- badged outlaws on the loose.
Despite how you feel about Sheriff Joe's personal conduct, government suspicions or the severity of criminal discipline, there is no doubt that the feds' entanglements into his affairs are a massive overreach of local and state laws and jurisdictions. It is pathetic that President Barack Obama, as well as the entire left-wing progressive establishment, is in a multimillion-dollar smear campaign to discredit and take down Sheriff Joe, as the sheriff's own re-election website proclaims, because he has "led the fight in Arizona against illegal immigration."
Rush Limbaugh was right in recently calling out the MSM's bias against Sheriff Joe in that not a single left-wing news source has reported that the sheriff has received repeated online death threats by an avid Obama supporter. But a year ago, when then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a madman, the MSM were quick to incriminate any right-wing sources, including polemical innuendoes on former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's and Limbaugh's websites, for contributing to the killing spree on that dark, tragic Arizona day.
My question is this: If there isn't any credence to the left-wing's demonizing and entrapment of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, then why would billionaire progressive George Soros spend millions of dollars on anti-Arpaio campaigns and pledge millions more to defeat the toughest U.S. sheriff's re-election?..."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"...Of course, if you mention the term sheriff at the moment, most thoughts go racing to Arizona and Maricopa County's 20-year sheriff, Joe Arpaio, and his plight with the feds and fight against illegal immigration.
Regardless of the fact that there are a plethora of amazing sheriffs across the country doing incredible work subduing lawbreakers and keeping their counties clean of mischief, the mainstream media, or MSM, are working double time with the federal government to make sure that when you think of sheriffs, the picture painted in your mind is one of runaway renegades -- badged outlaws on the loose.
Despite how you feel about Sheriff Joe's personal conduct, government suspicions or the severity of criminal discipline, there is no doubt that the feds' entanglements into his affairs are a massive overreach of local and state laws and jurisdictions. It is pathetic that President Barack Obama, as well as the entire left-wing progressive establishment, is in a multimillion-dollar smear campaign to discredit and take down Sheriff Joe, as the sheriff's own re-election website proclaims, because he has "led the fight in Arizona against illegal immigration."
Rush Limbaugh was right in recently calling out the MSM's bias against Sheriff Joe in that not a single left-wing news source has reported that the sheriff has received repeated online death threats by an avid Obama supporter. But a year ago, when then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a madman, the MSM were quick to incriminate any right-wing sources, including polemical innuendoes on former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's and Limbaugh's websites, for contributing to the killing spree on that dark, tragic Arizona day.
My question is this: If there isn't any credence to the left-wing's demonizing and entrapment of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, then why would billionaire progressive George Soros spend millions of dollars on anti-Arpaio campaigns and pledge millions more to defeat the toughest U.S. sheriff's re-election?..."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 21, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: CNS News "Still the Land of Dreams: 150 Million Want to Immigrate to U.S."
Terence P. Jeffrey:
"CNSNews.com) - It has become a cliché for politicians who want to provide some sort of pathway to U.S. citizenship to the estimated 11.2 million illegal aliens living in the United States to say that these illegal aliens will need to “go to the back of the line” first.
However, there are already about 150 million adults living in countries around the world who would migrate to the United States if they could, according to a Gallup survey released on Friday.
That does not count any children these 150 million would-be immigrants might want to bring with them to the United States.
To arrive at this figure, Gallup interviewed 452,199 people at least 15 years or older in 151 countries around the world from 2009 and 2011. Gallup asked: “Ideally, if you had the opportunity, would you like to move permanently to another country, or would you prefer to continue living in this country? To which country would you like to move?”
The 150 million people whom Gallup estimated would like to come to the United States includes 22 million Chinese, 15 million Nigerians, 10 million Indians, 8 million Bangladeshis, 7 million Brazilians, 5 million Filipinos, 5 million Japanese, 5 million Mexicans, and 3 million each from Vietnam, Kenya and the United Kingdom.
In Liberia, 37 percent of all adults want to leave their homeland and move permanently to the United States of America. In Sierra Leone, it’s 30 percent. In Dominican Republic, it’s 26 percent. In Haiti, it’s 24 percent. And in Cambodia, it’s 22 percent.
By far, according to Gallup's survey, America is still the No. 1 land of dreams for would be immigrants...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"CNSNews.com) - It has become a cliché for politicians who want to provide some sort of pathway to U.S. citizenship to the estimated 11.2 million illegal aliens living in the United States to say that these illegal aliens will need to “go to the back of the line” first.
However, there are already about 150 million adults living in countries around the world who would migrate to the United States if they could, according to a Gallup survey released on Friday.
That does not count any children these 150 million would-be immigrants might want to bring with them to the United States.
To arrive at this figure, Gallup interviewed 452,199 people at least 15 years or older in 151 countries around the world from 2009 and 2011. Gallup asked: “Ideally, if you had the opportunity, would you like to move permanently to another country, or would you prefer to continue living in this country? To which country would you like to move?”
The 150 million people whom Gallup estimated would like to come to the United States includes 22 million Chinese, 15 million Nigerians, 10 million Indians, 8 million Bangladeshis, 7 million Brazilians, 5 million Filipinos, 5 million Japanese, 5 million Mexicans, and 3 million each from Vietnam, Kenya and the United Kingdom.
In Liberia, 37 percent of all adults want to leave their homeland and move permanently to the United States of America. In Sierra Leone, it’s 30 percent. In Dominican Republic, it’s 26 percent. In Haiti, it’s 24 percent. And in Cambodia, it’s 22 percent.
By far, according to Gallup's survey, America is still the No. 1 land of dreams for would be immigrants...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)