Mitt Romney in the Southland

"Given your crusade against Mutt Romney"

I'm glad you recognize Precious and his campaign is a dog.

It’s tough, but not impossible. We’ve gotten more used to Governors (or VPs) as standard-bearers in recent years. The likelihood is that the rodents will put up a Senator, as they did in ‘04, so Fred will be evenly matched there (albeit as a former Senator). You have to remember that arguably our greatest GOP President (ole Abe) was a former one-term Whig Congressman who had been out of office 12 years. He never had experience as a Chief Exec, but he sure had a baptism by fire, didn’t he ?

3 to 4000 more little children were brutally killed and ripped from the womb today in our country, because of the decades of support for that practice from liberal politicians like Mitt Romney. What could conceivably be more repellent than that?
Have you really listened to that ‘02 debate? It is enough to make a person puke, especially in the context of the things Romney is saying today.

Yes, I have. How would it have been different if Romney had not been elected as governor? I think it would have been worse, according to Mass. the pro-life community.

You’re changing the subject. I was talking about the repulsive words and actions of one Mitt Romney.

"Given your crusade against Mutt Romney"
I'm glad you recognize Precious and his campaign is a dog.

I did fat-finger that one. :) It's late here in Virginia.

Romney’s relationship with the pro-life community during his term were hardly as you present them. You’re trying to deceive good people about that.

I know folks who were working there then, and the Romney administration wouldn’t give them the time of day.

And, in the 2002 debate, he not only strenuously defended his hardcore support for abortion since before Roe, he ran away from the pro-life groups like a scalded cat.

We’re always ready to pounce. ;-D

You’d better go to bed before you start to call him Mickey Rooney. ;-)

It’s tough, but not impossible. We’ve gotten more used to Governors (or VPs) as standard-bearers in recent years. The likelihood is that the rodents will put up a Senator, as they did in ‘04, so Fred will be evenly matched there (albeit as a former Senator). You have to remember that arguably our greatest GOP President (ole Abe) was a former one-term Whig Congressman who had been out of office 12 years. He never had experience as a Chief Exec, but he sure had a baptism by fire, didn’t he ?

Indeed he did. :)

Romney’s relationship with the pro-life community during his term were hardly as you present them. You’re trying to deceive good people about that.
I know folks who were working there then, and the Romney administration wouldn’t give them the time of day.
And, in the 2002 debate, he not only strenuously defended his hardcore support for abortion since before Roe, he ran away from the pro-life groups like a scalded cat.

I suppose that's why Mitt was recently presented with an award and also why Planned Parenthood protested? Look, I hate abortions, too. I know we disagree on this one, but I believe what he says about his public conversion and I think that he would be a great advocate to overturn Roe because of his experience as governor that led to his conversion. I also believe that he will appoint conservative justices, which is what must happen to overturn Roe.

Romney on Immigration: Where's The Flip? Where's The Flop?

McCainiacs and Thompson Kool-Aid drinkers eagerly claim Mitt Romney has flip-flopped on illegal immigration. Reviewing the basis for that claim compels the conclusion that it is very empty indeed.

The Washington Times reported on March 15, 2006:

An enthusiastic supporter of legal immigration, Mr. Romney not only opposes illegal immigration, but he told National Review that he is also "against an amnesty and against anything that provides an incentive for people to come here illegally."

What exactly did Romney tell National Review in late 2005?

In the future, Romney may want to pick some battles he can win. Perhaps illegal immigration will be one of them, given its rising importance among grassroots conservatives. "I'm very much in favor of legal immigration and I'm opposed to illegal immigration," says Romney. "We're in a race for the best minds, and I wish we could bring in more of these people." Last year, the governor threatened to veto a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses, but the legislation never made it to his desk. He actually did veto a bill that would have given illegal aliens the right to in-state tuition at public universities. He hasn't taken a formal position on any of the federal immigration plans. "I'm against an amnesty and against anything that provides an incentive for people to come here illegally." [Emphasis added.]

That was in NR's cover story for the December 14, 2005 issue.

Some are claiming that this 49-second bit of audio, supposedly from a Boston Globe interview with Romney at about the same time, on November 30, 2005, establishes him as pro-amnesty. I defy any reader to listen to this clip and draw a firm, supportable conclusion from it. Nothing he says in this Globe clip is inconsistent with what he told National Review. Romney is simply quoted as describing McCain's proposal as "reasonable" and perhaps "not amnesty." He does not say he is endorsing the proposal.

That is a flip-flop? That is an endorsement of McCain-Kennedy?

Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts also belies any claim that he is soft on immigration:

2003 - Eliminates Bilingual Education, Enacts English Immersion
2004 - Vetoes College Tuition For Illegals
2004 - Opposes Driver's License's For Illegals
7/2006 - Supports Building A Wall Along The Entire Border
9/2006 - Works To Enact Program For State To Cooperate With Feds To Enforce Immigration Laws

So I'd encourage everyone not to fall so deeply in love with the "Romney is a flip-flopper" meme that you find flips-- or flops-- where none exist.

Presented an award? Blech. He bought out that organization, and installed his wife as its leader. It’s just more Romney smoke and mirrors.

But what if his “conversion” is a ruse and he “decides” that a litmus test for a SCOTUS nominee is “too divisive” (in order to get them through a rodent Senate) ? We can’t take that risk. Fred had a solid pro-life voting record in the Senate.

You’d better go to bed before you start to call him Mickey Rooney. ;-)

LOL! I'm shutting down now. Good night.

G’night.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/16/romneys_words_grow_hard_on_immigration/

McCain-Kennedy isn’t the answer,” Romney said in a well-received speech to conservatives in Washington this month, describing it as an amnesty plan that would reward people for breaking the law and cost taxpayers millions to provide them benefits.

But that is markedly different from how Romney once characterized McCain’s bill, elements of which are receiving new attention in Congress and from President Bush. Indeed, Romney’s past comments on illegal immigration suggest his views have hardened as he has ramped up his campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.

In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as “quite different” from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.

“That’s very different than amnesty, where you literally say, ‘OK, everybody here gets to stay,’ “ Romney said in the interview. “It’s saying you could work your way into becoming a legal resident of the country by working here without taking benefits and then applying and then paying a fine.”

Romney did not specifically endorse McCain’s bill, saying he had not yet formulated a full position on immigration. But he did speak approvingly of efforts by McCain and Bush to solve the nation’s immigration crisis, calling them “reasonable proposals.”

Romney also said in the interview that it was not “practical or economic for the country” to deport the estimated 12 million immigrants living in the US illegally.

And I suppose he bought out Planned Parenthood, too?

The reputable National Review (unlike the Boston Globe) said he position at the exact time of the misleading Boston Globe Quote was:

What exactly did Romney tell National Review in late 2005?

In the future, Romney may want to pick some battles he can win. Perhaps illegal immigration will be one of them, given its rising importance among grassroots conservatives. “I’m very much in favor of legal immigration and I’m opposed to illegal immigration,” says Romney. “We’re in a race for the best minds, and I wish we could bring in more of these people.” Last year, the governor threatened to veto a bill that would have allowed illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses, but the legislation never made it to his desk. He actually did veto a bill that would have given illegal aliens the right to in-state tuition at public universities. He hasn’t taken a formal position on any of the federal immigration plans. “I’m against an amnesty and against anything that provides an incentive for people to come here illegally.”

Even the partial audio clip you provided shows without argument that up until a year and half ago, Romney was playing the same semantic game as Bush and McCain about what constitutes amnesty.

But I know you’ll deny the obvious ‘til the cows come home, as you always do, so have at it. I’m going to bed.

But what if his “conversion” is a ruse and he “decides” that a litmus test for a SCOTUS nominee is “too divisive” (in order to get them through a rodent Senate) ? We can’t take that risk. Fred had a solid pro-life voting record in the Senate.

One last post. There are no guarantees with any candidate. I recall having the same concerns about George W. Bush in 2000. Fred will get my full attention if he decides to run.