No but that wasn't and isn't his take on the issue. He very clearly noted FAMILIES in this country for a long period of time. Why is this such a difficult thing to grasp?
so if they get away with a crime long enough, they should be rewarded?
and if an illegal has lived here 5 years and has 2 kids, they should be punished?
newt also support the immigration law in arizona, which makes no note of not applying to those who have lived here a long time and have FAMILIES........
so if newt supports allowing illegals with FAMILIES to remain in america, but supports making it illegal for them to be able to find work, how does he expect illegals with FAMILIES to support those FAMILIES?
1. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that most crimes have a statute of limitations.
Do you disagree with the concept?
2. What crime was committed by those family members either born here, or below the age of majority when they were brought here by the adult in charge?
3. As for those who actully broke the law, how many years of tax-paying, civil behavior and serving in the armed forces of this nation would be enough to be allowed to remain?
Newt's premise seems serviceable to me.
4. This is one of those cases where the Left attempts to use a charge of hypocricy against the Right.
Seems pretty clear that the Right can't do the same with respect to a philosophy that has no ethical principles.