Saturday, August 18, 2012
Made Clear During the Republican Debate (2007)
(Note: I had forgotten that I had settled on Mitt Romney as my second choice in May of 2007. This archived blog on Redstate.com reminded me of that, and why. I still think he might have defeated Obama in 2008.)
There are only four of our candidates who have the right answer when asked about the immigration problem. The most outspoken, of course, are Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo. Joining them are Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee (provisionally). Already on record with the right answer, but "not yet running" is Fred Thompson.
What do I consider the "right answer?" Securing the border is the first order of business in order to solve the problem. Fred Thompson has stated it flat out. Mitt says do it first, as do Hunter and Tancredo. Huckabee lists it first on his website, but it's not clear if he means "do it first, before anything else," or just "it has to be done."
All the other candidates fail this simple test, because they insist on a "comprehensive" solution. Folks, a comprehensive solution only guarantees that the problem will get worse, not better. Discussing what to do about the illegal residents already here before we stop more people from joining them is a prescription for failure. For me, the failure on this one question disqualifies Rudy and McCain, and let's face it, only they and Romney and Fred Thompson have a chance in this race, as much as some people want it to not be that way.
Now, I'm not normally a single issue voter, but in this case I make an exception because (1) I think the immigration problem is far and away the biggest problem facing the country, and (2) only a person who is challenged by logic or a person who puts something else above solving the problem could conclude that a "comprehensive" solution is the way to go.
It may surprise some people that I consider the Un-secured Border a bigger problem than the situation in Iraq, but I do, and here's why: Iraq is going to solve itself, one way or another, and no matter what happens in Iraq, it won't have a direct effect on life in the US (not that the indirect effects won't be important). If it progresses very badly very quickly, all of our major candidates would respond appropriately. If it goes well, the same holds true. So that issue doesn't distinguish one aspirant from another.
The illegal immigration problem, OTOH, is an insidious one. If it isn't attacked directly, we'll be overwhelmed before we know it, and securing the border is the essential, exclusive first step in the solution. It's also a problem that a strong Chief Executive can solve with very little interference from Congress.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't vote for any of them over a Democrat, but it means my preferred ticket will be headed by Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney. And I agree with them on other issues as well.