Newt Gingrich is taking a bit of heat for his statement in the debate last night that he would be in favor of offering some kind of amnesty to illegal immigrants who have been in the country for 25 years, have family ties, have paid their taxes, are part of the community and have not been in trouble with the law.

I think the reaction to this is a bit overblown. I mean, how many illegal immigrants are there who have actually paid their taxes?

Its not amnesty. They wouldnt have a path to citizenship. I agree with his stance on the issue.

Not to say I agree or disagree, but how is that not amnesty? They get to legally live and work in the country. Isn't that what those opposed to the idea are calling a 'magnet'?

However, my point was that Newt is being a politician here. His plan covers exactly zero people.

What is his "plan"? I dont believe he has articulated a plan, just expressed an opinion.

They get to live here, work and do everything a citizen can except vote. How is that not amnesty?

Please read my original post. Those are the words he used.

I didnt think there was much wrong with it either. Like he said why break up a family that has been together for 25 years. I think the shock is that he actually broke away from party lines on this??

Isn't it just so typical how when someone becomes the front runner in politics that everyone just cannot wait to pull him or her down. Even my republican friends cannot take this guy because he did a PSA with Nancy Pelosi on global warming .... apparently if you are a Republican you cannot believe in it??? Also he apparently cheated on 2 ex wives .... I would think most of these guys have done the same to their current wives. They are all so such hipocrits.

Please understand that my first post was sarcastic.

You know its actually possible to fall under the label of Republican and not be Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum, just like its possible to be a Democrat and not be like Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid. Not everyone is a hard line stereotype.

Not sure how I can say it more clearly. My post was sarcastic. It was not directed at the issue, but Newt's specific comments about how he would grant some form of legal status to illegal aliens who have paid their taxes.

Does no one but me see the hippocracy of that?

My comment was directed more at Finesse's buddies.

But how does it make him a hypocrite? I tend to agree with his position because its not a black and white issue. Look no further than Uncle Omar as an illegal who was paying his taxes. Unfortunately that DUI was a bit of an issue.

Degs I saw the sarcasm in their but the thing is that I actually saw his comment when he made it & that is rare since I really never watch these debates. But when he made it I was flipping the channels & heard the question & was curious to what his answer would be & to a (what my wife says I am) bleeding heart liberal it was a bit good to hear.
I also agree with Jammers comment. it would be nice if these people had the guts to stray from party lines. I bet there are alot more pro choice republicans as well as alot more fiscal conservative democrats out there who are to concerned about winning elections to voice their true feelings.

Totally agree with you here.

Don't know who Uncle Omar is. Also don't understand how someone without a Social Security Number can pay their income taxes. (And if they use someone else's SS#, then that violates his statement about them having to follow our laws.)

So add those two together and he's talking about a policy that zero people qualify for. That's what the hypocrisy is all about.

Uncle Omar is Obama's uncle who works at a liquor store in Framingham, MA and was pulled over for a DUI about a month or so ago. He has a regular job so I'm assuming he pays taxes on it. He got it back after being busted and it was on the news.

I don't employ illegals so I don't know how it is they pay taxes or have legit SS#s. Can't really comment any further on that.

If someone is granted legal status (residency), wouldn't they be issued a social security number?

It seems to me you're jumping all over an opinion Gingrich expressed without knowing all the details of what he would do.

I'm not a big Newt supporter, and am very in favor of kicking illegals out of this country, but I could go for this kind of thinking. 25 years living in the US ... been a part of the community .... paid their taxes ... can operate a bank machine using English. I would be open to it.

You seem to miss my point. If they've been living here for 25 years without a ss# then they haven't been following the laws. That's been my point all along. I agree with the idea of not worrying about those who are not a problem, but he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

Yes, I am missing your point because I don't see where you have one.

Newt is providing a practical solution to solve a problem that cannot be solved ideally. I find that refreshing from a candidate of a major political party.

You're stuck on 25 years, but he simply used that to present a hypothetical situation.

I'm not stuck on 25 years. You seem to be.
I'm stuck on the idea that an illegal alien has paid their taxes. Those types of illegal aliens don't exist so he's offer a solution for nobody.

Not sure that is accurate. Do you believe that every single illegal alien gets paid cash under the table where they work?

I definitely see your point but my guess is that the government looks the other way at a lot of these folks and lets them operate as though they are normal US citizens. I may be wrong and as I said I'm just guessing. But if that is the case then I think Gingrich is correct that these folks should become a welcomed addition to the US population.

Check again.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/tax ... axes_N.htm