-41 votes

Rand Paul Betrayal -Calls for Citizen Path for Illegals!

He is showing his true colors now............

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83737.html

He certainly does not have an ounce of his father's integrity!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Rational Solution

Rand Paul's immigration solution seems to be the most rational of anything proposed. It's not amnesty but it's not forced deportations. What should we do round people up and spend billions of dollars doing so and hurt the economy by shipping out labor? or Mitt Romney's voluntary deportation whatever that was? This seems like a good middle ground position that is rational and possible that both sides could come together on it. Although I doubt that would happen.

Of course!

Perfectly rational. And it would be perfectly rational to anticipate the increased flood of immigrants who would be pouring across the border knowing that they would be made "citizens" in short order.
Duh. Close down the welfare state THEN talk about "amnesty". Until then, it is giving the country away to the third world.

Dont know about you...

but I'd rather live in a free nation with a generous immigration system than all of us here living in a tyranny. The devil will be in the details of any agreement. I can deal with illegals who have been here for years being given a path to citizenship, if the US stops having a total open borders, welfare state policy.

You know, most libertarians support open borders? The immigration that the US government allows must be an economic benefit to the country- not a drain. A few years ago, I would have flipped out against any compromise regarding "path to citizenship" for illegals. But in light of the demographic shift and the latest election- I think this is a smart move for Rand.

Visit https://soundcloud.com/politics-of-freedom for all recent Ron Paul interviews, speeches, debates, forums, panels, press conferences, news coverage, and Texas Straight Talk updates!

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, while war is the terrorism of

Better to get ahead of this issue

As far as I can tell Obama and the Senate are all gung ho for amnesty, and I doubt enough members of the House will stand strong, so it is time to take that bull by the horns.

RP doesn't tow

the Republican Party line of building private prisons to lock up "illegal aliens" or spending hundreds of thousands of dollars beefing up Homeland Security and tracking them down and deporting them.... the principles of Liberty, Justice and Natural Rights extend to all who live on our soil...

When the government wants to bring in oppressive measures

for use on its own people, starting out with foreigners/aliens is the
often perfect "in".

Example -

All foreigners in Japan are obligated to carry alien registration
cards at all times (except for some ethnic Koreans and Chinese
that were born here, but don't have citizenship).

Japanese are not legally obligated to carry ID.

*But* there are documented cases of Japanese police
stopping and detaining Japanese citizens without ID
justifying it by saying that they don't look or act Japanese
enough, so they must be foreigners, so where's your ID?

"Logical" next step? Make the Japanese carry ID so it can
be determined that they are not foreigners..for their
own protection, of course..

There are reasons for that old Golden Rule.

good point

so its a good idea to keep well stocked on foreigners to use as guinea pigs, terrorist threats and the occasional pandemic carrier...

Phxarcher87's picture

I love mexican....

Food and Pinatas, they are such an integral part of my life.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" - Mark Twain

Well even my Mexican friends

Well even my Mexican friends that I work with say they don't ever go back across the border because of how bad it sucks down there. I don't blame them. Importing a nations destitute and poor while distributing welfare has serious economic consequences though. The left paired the plaque on the statue of liberty with Johnson's great society and told us it will be okay if we do this. In the 19th century work ready immigrants came and worked and established communities. Now...not so much, their vote is bought with welfare promises and subsidization.

Southern Agrarian

What's the alternative?

Rounding up millions of people like Nazi's and sending them where? To Mexico?

We have no choice, as a nation, to offer a path to citizenship. It's a consequence of not properly enforcing border protection policies.

Oh wait, Ron Paul agreed that

Oh wait, Ron Paul agreed that illegals that have been here for so long should have the ability to become citizens, and that we can't deport millions of illegals. Because it's logical and libertarian.

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

Ron Paul doesn't even like calling them "illegal"

He always calls them undocumented, and often notes in conjunction that in a truly libertarian society, we'd have an open border.

But yeah, I'm not getting whatever makes this a betrayal on Rand's part.

People who are getting steamed up about this

should probably read a little more into libertarian theory. Most of them are in favor of open borders.

Sure, entitlements make this less contextually viable, but structurally, Rand is doing the right thing. This is about as close as you can get to appealing to moderates and staying ideologically consistent at the same time.

Just get rid of all the free goodies...

-Free public education
-Medicaid
-Welfare checks
-Food stamps

And then I don't care what kind of illegal or legal immigrants come into this country.

This must be done.

This is what has to be done if we are to create a path to citizenship, which I am completely in favor of doing. Immigration is a good thing. We cannot, however, allow even more people to come and live off of the system.

Getting rid of prosperity

seems to work well as a deterrent - what with two terms
of Bush and one of Obama they've managed to get the
rate way down just by crashing the economy.

Pretty soon we'll be seeing people fleeing across Lake Superior
or the Florida Straits in makeshift craft - to countries
that can somehow afford to provide education and medical care.

You beat me to it

+1

It's so hysterical to call

It's so hysterical to call this "betrayal"....dear god, he's doing his job as a senator, and because he's not talking about gunning down brown people, he's "showing his true colors". facepalm.

Yep, he's a US senator all right

Representing everyones "interests" but those who foot the bills.Ugh.

As a libertarian

As a libertarian, immigration was one of the few issues where I parted ways with Ron Paul. It was not enough for me not to support him obviously. I still am not a fan of birthright citizenship, but I am pretty favorable to the idea of open borders, because if we are a truly free country, individuals should be free to come and go as they wish.

That being said, I applaud Rand Paul's willingness to come up with a compromise on this and mandatory sentences for drug offenders. I think this is a very libertarian thing to do, and I look forward to his next four years.

liberty lover in Nor Cal!

Immigration is a real

Immigration is a real issue...by which I mean that congress is given the right by section 8 under naturalization to make laws regarding it. Now that being said...whether you agrer with him or not does not matter...its just a difference of opinion. I personally agree with this stance cor the simple reason that the economic cost of deporting them is significant. Besides he says the path should not be easy, just that it should exist...he also wants to stop immigration till they are absorbed, this will anger other countries which will in turn place more pressure on mexico. I think the US will benefit from this. The US has always been built on immigration...the original settlers were illegal immigrants, many immigrants were former business owners in their countries of origin. For instance I worked with a Honduran who owned his own shoe making company until NAFTA destroyed it...he then moved here...ended up working for someone else, but should ue ever choose to there is nothing stopping him from starting his business up again. To me immigrants like him are a net benefit to the country. Most immgrants I have worked with illegal or not were harder working than most of their American Coworkers which translates into higher profits for the companies they work for...which in turn gives extra capital for those companies to either hire more workers or buy more equipment, which in turn benefits the companies which makes that equipment. The argument that immigrants are stealing jobs is just as true as the argument that machines steal jobs...which is to say its a logical fallacy as far as economics go....whether a business owner uses machines or cheaper labor as opposed to more expensive labor, the effect is the business owner saves more money...which he will use to expand his business...he will need equipment which is going to be made by businesses that will need skilled over cheap labor....you see the cycle here....lower costs ALWAYS lead to a healthier economy when you look at the large picture. The other side of the coin is that immigrants dont work for much cheaper than Amercans...for instance that Honduran coworker of mine was only pain less than I was because I was Foreman, not because he was Honduran.....the first job they take they may do cheaply...but they quickly learn the going rate for a set skill and ask it the next time. Another things...all the immigrants I worked with paid payroll taxes and filed income tax right along with me....so I am sorry, but Rand is RIGHT on this issue. I dont believe that we should make the immigration laws more lax...but since they are here already its cheaper and benefits the economy to give them a path to citizenship. We do howevee need to enforce the law strictly in the future...even if it means building a forty billion dollar wall along the border

I agreed, but then you lost me with the 40 billion dollar wall

Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offence.
Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
That wants it down.' Something there is that doesn't love a wall......
http://writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/frost-mending.html

True..I have no desire for a

True..I have no desire for a wall, it was simply an avenue for enforcement....the 40 billion dollar figure is just something I read on how much it would cost to build such a thing. A better solution would of course be to bring our troops home and set them on the border, but under the current political climate the government spending more money on a wall to "create jobs" is far more likely.

Idealy there would be no need for a border fence

People could simply travel back and forth freely with simple border security like we have with Canada. The problems with Mexico run deeper than that, that's another problem the federal government is responsible for and is neglecting. Like you outlined above, the welfare system is an attraction, fix that and it will go a long way to allowing people to come here to work, but not to collect entitlements.

What the heck Reenie?

Why don't you go buy "Liberty Defined" and read Ron Paul's stance on immigration before claiming Rand's a traitor for being willing to work out a solution to the illegal immigration problem.

Nobody has a video? We are just letting the MSN dictate truth???

Just as Ron was always given the benefit of the doubt, we should at least do the same for Rand.

I am sure that what he is for is merely simplification of the code of federal regulations (CFR), thats all.

Immigration law is too complex (just like the tax code) and needs to be simplified.

Right now you are more likely to be deported if you follow the law than if you don't follow the law.

This is what is driving and feeding the criminal elements and enriching law firms who deal in it.

You shouldn't need a lawyer to immigrate but that is the harsh situation today and I suspect Rand wants to simplify it all such that the honest but practical people are properly rewarded for following the process without fear of bankrupting themselves through endless attorney fees and ad hoc/random deportation.

.

.

"Here's the problem..."

"There is zero evidence the States had ever surrendered their authority over internal State immigration matters to the federal government. The Constitution’s enumerated powers say nothing about immigration. What power not expressly granted means it was expressly withheld."

http://www.federalistblog.us/2010/07/feds_argue_pre-eminent_...

As a Libertarian, I'm still in favor of the most "openness" possible with regard to immigraion. Building fences is impractical and anti-freedom.

Hey Reenie, mind if I call

Hey Reenie, mind if I call you Weenie? Well, Weenie, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You don't know what the plan will entail for one. And for another, what do you propose? Mass deportation? What happened to the land of the free? My motto is "Don't tread on me." But a mere presence is not treading. Criminal acts and receiving government benefits are treading. Why not make a distinction?

We are a nation of law.

One of those laws is you come here legally, I don't see how it is a good policy to reward someone who has come here illegally breaking the law right away. Sure we cannot deport them, but if they are caught breaking the law while here, out they go.

You know what would happen if you were to illegally immigrate into Mexico? You would be thrown into a Mexican prison if you're lucky. You know why? Because illegal immigration is AGAINST THE LAW and most countries consider it a national security issue, except for us of course.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Your position really isn't much different

from what Rand is talking about. He's talking about working out a deal with the Democrats (They do control the Senate.) - they give us tighter border security, we give them legalization for law-abiding illegals who are already here. Rand does not support letting violent criminals who are illegal stay in this country, much less get put on a path to citizenship. We can't leave things as they are, otherwise, the illegals will keep coming and the only way to get tighter border security and deportation of alien criminals is to give them something they want on this issue. I'm not really for legalizing adults who came here themselves, but, I do get the argument about people brought here as kids. The important thing though, it to make sure that border is airtight while we're legalizing them and make the process as quick as possible.

Once the current illegals are weeded out and the law-abiding ones legalized (not automatically citizenized), there should be a no tolerance policy. You sneak into the country illegally, you get deported - end of story.