If I were a de facto owner of a brand new Ferrari, I’d be pretty happy. I would not push the matter to get rid of “de facto” in my title.
Marco Rubio and others have hammered us with the term de facto amnesty. I think this comes from a low rate of deportation for those who are known to be here illegally. Why is there such a push for “immigration reform” by a great many Democrats? If what we have is de facto amnesty, that’s pretty sweet for illegals.
Without being an expert on immigration, I find this line being spoon-fed to us by Establishment Republicans to be obviously untrue. My understanding of the word amnesty is that it means to declare illegal immigrants here legally. We have not done that, not even in a de facto way. Those who are found out and are not deported are allowed to remain here illegally.
Americans for a Conservative Direction is running a commercial on FOX now pushing this line about “de facto amnesty.” They say that the current immigration bill strengthens border security first, makes illegal immigrants pay fines, and (it does not mention) that they then become illegal. That “first” part is not accurate. The amnesty proposed in the bill is not conditional on border security. The Democrats would never support something like that.
Doing nothing is not de facto amnesty. Voting for the bill is actual amnesty.
Continue Reading at YoungPatriots.com