Democrats, far-left praise Marco Rubio's immigration moves (NCLR; Sharry; IPC; Obama and Gutierrez spox)

In a January 18, 2013 press release, Marco Rubio lists some of the supposed conservatives who support his immigration amnesty plan ( ).

To be balanced, here are some positive mentions of his plan (or at least support for his actions on comprehensive immigration reform) from those Rubio should be opposing on immigration: the Democrats and the far-left.

Speaking only in general terms, when the National Council of La Raza praises someone on immigration that's not a good sign: they strongly support illegal immigration in order to gain racial power, and they aren't about to praise anything or anyone that gets in the way of that.

Rubio should be opposing the NCLR, working to discredit them and reduce their power. Instead, Rubio gets a shout-out from them.

These probably won't make it to a Rubio press release:

* White House press secretary Jay Carney ( ):

"We are encouraged - referring now to recent reports‚ that Senator Rubio's thinking - as reported - so closely reflects the president's blueprint for reform," Carney said. "The president has long called for partners from both sides of the aisle. And he has lamented the absence of partners from the other side of the aisle. It used to be a bipartisan pursuit, comprehensive immigration reform. For a while, it ceased to be. But he certainly hopes that it will be in the future."

Carney said Rubio's "ideas bode well for a productive, bipartisan debate," and said the administration hoped other Republicans followed suit.

"We hope that it signals a change in the Republican approach to this issue, because if we are going to get this done, it's going to take more than just a handful of Republicans working across the aisle," Carney said. "It's a kind of thing, comprehensive immigration reform, that requires significant bipartisan support. And he hopes that this augers well for the future."

Make sure and see Obama immigration for all the many things Obama has said and done to enable massive and illegal immigration, even though he co-sponsored this bill.

* Clarissa Martinez De Castro of the National Council of La Raza (see both those links; quote source at ):

"[Rubio] has the potential to be a force for building the space in which Republicans are meaningfully considering resolutions to this problem," said Martinez-De-Castro. "The expectations are high for his leadership on this."

See the first two links in this section. If Rubio was proposing a plan that would deprive the NCLR of power, try and imagine what she'd say (hint: it would be very different).

* Douglas Rivlin, spokesman for Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois) (source: ):

"[Rubio's proposal is] generally encouraging".

That might not seem like much, except Rivlin is a very strong supporter of illegal immigration and he's not wont to praise Republicans, see his name's link. His boss is an even stronger supporter. Gutierrez went as far as calling ICE agents "Gestapo agents", calling Tom Tancredo a "gringo", and trying to give illegal aliens a better home loan rate than veterans (see his name's link for much more). Now, his spokesman is encouraged by Rubio's plan.

* Frank Sharry (see his name's link; source ibid):

"He's doing an awesome job of bringing along conservatives and bringing along conservatives in the media," said Frank Sharry, the founder of America's Voice, which advocates for comprehensive reform. "He's making enormous progress in making reform palatable to people on the right in a way that no one has before."

"I think it's encouraging. He's talking about the basic elements of reform shared by pro-reform Republicans and the vast majority of Democrats," Sharry said.

* "The Rubio Immigration Plan Conservatives Love Looks a Lot Like Obama's" in Mother Jones is authored by Adam Serwer (see his name's link) and has another Sharry quote ( ):

Rubio's immigration principles "are in line with [Democratic] principles," says Frank Sharry, director of the pro-immigration reform group America's Voice. "It's huge…We need conservatives to buy into the framework of a broad bill that simultaneously puts undocumented immigrants on the road to citizenship, modernizes our legal immigration system, and focuses enforcement on unauthorized hiring and exploitation in the workplace. Rubio is there."

Still, "there are many, many important details"-such as how long or difficult the road from legal status to citizenship would actually be-for reform advocates and opponents "to fight over," Sharry notes. One key difference is that Rubio seems willing to break up his proposal into multiple bills, which would make it easy for Republicans to kill off the parts they don't like.

Due to the dynamic discussed previously, that "key difference" is moot.

Not only does that have Sharry praising Rubio's actions yet again, but it also has Serwer - someone not entirely ignorant about immigration matters unlike some other writers - not really opposing Rubio's plan. If Rubio's plan would reduce illegal immigration and deprive the far-left of power, Serwer's take would be far different.

* The Immigration Policy Center (see the link) is a major supporter of amnesty (source: ibid):

Nevertheless, says the Immigration Policy Center's Mary Giovagnoli, immigration reform advocates believe that some form of legalization of the undocumented is the most important element of any proposal, and if there is agreement on that, the rest can be negotiated. "I'm more optimistic than I have been for the last few years," Giovagnoli says.

It's much better for the U.S when people like her are pessimistic. Rubio's making her optimistic instead.

* On Rachel Maddow's site, Steve Benen links to Serwer and says ( ):

At a certain level, I care more about the policy than who gets credit for the ideas. If Rubio wants to take the president's plan, put a new name at the top, and convince the right it's a Republican-friendly version, so be it. Indeed, Rubio's contempt for Obama suggests the senator may want to maintain the fiction, at least publicly, that his plan is somehow distinct from the White House's.

But putting the Republican's posturing aside, the obvious overlap between the two similar approaches makes the odds of legislative success that much better.

* Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-California) didn't praise Rubio or his plan directly, but as with the NCLR his response would be far different if Rubio's plans would deprive him of power ( ):

"I think the more we talk about getting it (immigration reform) down, the better. We always welcome voices in Congress that talk about getting something done and fixing the broken immigration system. I welcome any comment that takes us forward", [Becerra said]... When asked his thoughts on Rubio’s proposal for a tax on illegal immigrants who "come out of the shadows," Becerra said that, "no one’s been proposing amnesty, and everyone has been proposing that folks come out of the shadows, that’s been around for years."

Needless to say, Rubio and his defenders would also deny he's proposing amnesty; see reform not amnesty for the word games such people use ("amnesty" is used in this post as shorthand for legalizing millions of illegal aliens).

As more praise for Rubio's plan or his actions comes in, they'll be added to this post.

And, to find out why you just can't trust him, see Marco Rubio.


* Sen. Pat Leahy has been near the center of pushes for amnesty for years. From another Serwer post (this one about conservative media caving on amnesty; source ):

"I expect that the Judiciary Committee will devote most of our time this Spring working to pass comprehensive immigration reform," Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) said during an appearance at the Georgetown University Law Center Wednesday. "I have a lot of respect for Marco Rubio," Leahy added. "We disagree on some things, but we agree on others, but I found him to be very open in his views and I'll seek that."

As with some of the other quotes, what matters is what Leahy didn't say: imagine how he'd react to an attrition plan for instance.

* The New York Times (see that, Andrew Rosenthal, Lawrence Downes, and NYT editorial) offers the editorial "The Immigration Saga Continues" ( ):

Senators are huddling and floating proposals; some Republicans, like Marco Rubio of Florida, are positioning themselves as reformers with vague but positive-sounding statements.

Senator Rubio has been out shopping his ideas: more visas for high-technology, professional and temporary agricultural workers, a national work-eligibility verification program and provisional legalization for the 11 million undocumented, who would not be granted permanent status until all other legal immigrants got their green cards.

Some of the 11 million could presumably become citizens one day, though Mr. Rubio has not said how that would work. If you force millions of people to wait at the end of a visa line that for some countries is already decades long, is that really a path to citizenship? Still, he rejects the mass-deportation, Arizona-style lunacy recently embraced by Republican leaders like Mitt Romney. For a party so prone to vilifying and criminalizing immigrants, that’s progress.

You did see the links above, right? The New York Times - which has been financially supported in part by Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim - has repeatedly lied, smeared, and misled in order to enable massive/illegal immigration and amnesty. As with the other quotes above, they would have responded very differently if Rubio's plan didn't serve their agenda.

* From a Dallas Morning News editorial ( ):

Rubio is combining toughness with fairness and practicality. In doing so, the conservative Republican is showing how America can step out of its immigration quandary.

* Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) said on MSNBC with Andrea Mitchell ( ):

"I applaud Senator Rubio for broaching that subject, for taking it head on and I also believe he made hints about allowing a path to citizenship particularly for DREAMers and I think that's absolutely essential."

Note: "DREAMers" is the term for those illegal aliens who'd be covered by the anti-American DREAM Act.