Posted on 04/02/2009 7:03:53 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
You will probably see some in 2012, unfortunately. The independents and democrats that gave us McCain in the open primaries in 2008, may give us Romney in 2012.
I’m willing to listen Romney on economy as I’m sure he understands it better, but the following statement is something I cannot never accept:
“Romney believes that one way to attract more minorities to the GOP is to pass immigration reform before the next election, saying the issue becomes demagogued by both parties on the campaign trail.”
This is wrong on so many levels. First, minorities (as well as every other demographic group) support border enforcement and stopping illegal immigration. This is where the common ground is and what GOP should advocate strongly.
Also, most people oppose “Amnesty”. Again, this opposition is what GOP should advocate.
Also, mass-amnesty is something that cannot be reversed. As a result, we would have 100M new dem-leaning voters (if GOP is lucky, it may get 40% but never majority because these immigrants tend to be poor welfare-loving people)
Anyway, simply shouting insults (towards Romney, dems or illegals) does not help anything. Instead, freepers should engage in honest debate and convince people like Romney to adapt law-abiding view. Unfortunately, what I have seen, only thing many freepers are able to do, is to shout RINO and other insults. It should not be a surprise if we keep losing elections if the level of intellectual argument are on par with dailykos and ACORN.
Romney, you’re off the island, too!
So, do you think you can get the party’s nomination away from obama at the convention? I guess it all depends how the economy goes, eh?
ping
I thought you’d be pleased to hear that I am now breaking w/Romney. I don’t like fitting people into boxes and making the boxes fit into slots. I find it a Democrat proclivity. On an alternate plane, I despise that so many Americans can think that ‘immigrant’ should necessarily connote ‘Spanish-speaker’. We all agree that this place is as close as it gets to heaven on earth and everybody wants to come here. The Spanish speakers qualify per proximity? That’s not right.
Amnesty aside, I suspect what is happening is the Obamacrats are attacking romney because they know obama is falling appart and 2012 is not going to win a second term.
They are just using the campaign 2008 template.
Unfortunatly we have many here who just hate romney for multiple reasons BESIDES his flip floping.
I will say this, I would rather have a romney who can be fliped to the side of reason than a McCain who is firm on the side of unreasonable.
Details please.
I see selective editing here.
...
“You have to have regulation, and we value regulation. What we don’t like is when you have regulation that was written in the 1920s or the early 1900s that hasn’t been updated for modern events.”
Romney added that regulations on some parts of the financial sector are “overly burdensome” while others are “nonexistent.”
...
Romney, who was a successful businessman before running the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics and winning election as the Bay State governor, said Congress was right to pass the controversial Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) last fall, but drew a distinction between preserving the nation’s financial system and bailing out companies.
...
Similarly, Romney is among the many Republicans who support a stimulus plan, but not in the form Congress passed in February.
“The best stimulus with the highest multiplier effect is one which gives money back to people rather than having government spend more, and so I think they got it wrong. It’s too much weighted toward spending, too little weighted toward tax reductions,” Romney said.
...
We have a responsibility to acknowledge the president when he’s doing the right things and to be critical of his mistakes; otherwise we lose credibility,” Romney said, citing Obama’s aggressive moves to shore up U.S. troops in Afghanistan and his use of predator drones to go after suspected terrorists along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border.
Still, Romney criticized Obama’s budget proposals as “completely out of line with what the world needs to see,” along with taking on other perceived policy shortcomings.
“There are plenty of opportunities to point out where he’s weak, and I think pointing out his mistakes that are real and substantive will strengthen our hand in the 2010 elections,” Romney said.
...
More details are needed.
These statements are too broad.
Mitt isn’t a leftist fool.
Without the rule of law, there really is no country.
This is indeed distressing because at the least I thought Romney could be a conservative voice on economic issues.Compounding this news is the equally distressing interview Newt Gingrich gave to Bill O'Reilly in which Mr. Newt claimed he, too, would like to see "comprehensive" immigration reform and more guest worker permits (O'Reilly's views as well). And, a week earlier, I saw people like Hunter and Cantor cross over to the dark side with their call for retracting bonuses in violation of our Constitution. I thought then and think today that my despair over the future of the GOP is well earned, but it is not well deserved.
Who will lead us out of this wilderness?
Regards . . . Penny
No, we don't, George.....and they don't have a natural affinity with us, either.
Sounds like you are another "Republican" born with a silver foot in his mouth.
Leni
I’m one of what you term ‘the Romney girls’. I didn’t love him for his hair. I liked his business prowess. And the fact that so many of you piled on him pushed a lot of us to embrace him. It’s that underdog thing. I’m no longer in his camp, but I wanted to explain that to you.
“Idiot statement.”
Do you really find it necessary to be so rude? Can’t you express yourself without being so? Rudeness is merely a sign of a weak intellect, more a DU tactic than the FR of the past. It has become more and more apparent here lately.
some people are effected subliminally...but I will take your word for it.
Same here, he’s lost me, too.
Spare me. No one is holding a gun to Romney's head, forcing him to flip-flop yet again.
I will say this, I would rather have a romney who can be fliped to the side of reason than a McCain who is firm on the side of unreasonable.
I'd rather have a candidate who tells us what he actually believes than a candidate who will tell us anything to get elected.
Do you really find it necessary to be such a flaming RINO apologist?
“I see selective editing here.”
VERY selective editing.
It won’t even take *all* of that. If all the border states simply did what Oklahoma did, it would be settled. Heck, they have NO illegals there anymore, and they didn’t deport anyone. The illegals simply left and went back to Tejas.
He is on the subject of immigration reform, which is the core discussion point of this thread. And this is what, his third position on the subject in as many years? But go ahead, ignore the 2,000 pound RINO in the living room.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.