Posted on 09/27/2011 4:39:10 PM PDT by shield
I don’t speak for all conservatives, but most every single conservative I know will gladly settle for Mitt Romney and support him over Barack Obama. Even the conservatives I know who right now are saying they could never support Mitt Romney will . . . when push comes to shove . . . support Mitt Romney.
The issue is that most conservatives, myself included, don’t want to settle for Mitt Romney. I don’t have a problem with him personally. He, his wife, and family are super nice people. But I think he is just wrong for this election and his positioning this year as a centrist when he positioned himself four years ago as a conservative is disturbing.
But at the top of the race we are confronted with two men who have two problems. Both are 10th Amendment issues and both are states right issues. And I think whether we like it or not, we should, as conservatives who believe the states should be engines of experiment, respect their right to solve problems in their states as they and their legislatures see fit.
You and I may not like Romneycare, but it was Mitt Romney and Massachusetts’ decision.
You and I may not like Texas giving illegal aliens in-state tuition rates, but it was Rick Perry and Texas’ decision.
Digging deeper though, there is a real and serious problem that distinguishes the two issues and gives me greater concern about Romneycare. And I’m afraid with so much pile on over the Texas immigration decision, it has distracted us from a core issue of Romneycare about which we should be more focused.
Texas did what Texas did because Washington failed to do anything. The difference between Mitt Romney and Rick Perry is that Perry never said that what Texas did on immigration is the right fit for every state.
Given Texas’ history and long standing ties to Mexico (a lot of its now major cities were founded back when Texas was part of Mexico and it continues to maintain historic ties to Mexico) and the failure of the federal government to deal with illegal immigration, Texas did what was right for Texas in a near unanimous vote of the legislature (only 4 no votes out of 181 members in the Texas legislature). Neither the administrations of Bill Clinton nor George W. Bush nor, for that matter, Barack Obama would let Texas deport all these people, so Texas decided that the kids should at least be given an education and made contributing members of society instead of sucking up tax dollars in jail or on government assistance for which federal law would not have allowed Texas to deny them.
At the same time, Perry supported Arizona’s right to handle the problem as Arizona saw fit. There’s never been a claim that the Texas solution is a one size fits all solution that Washington should impose.
Mitt Romney, however, came up with a healthcare plan that may be the only political position in modern American history on which he hasn’t stood on both sides, continues to defend it despite Massachusetts now being weighed down by a costly, dysfunctional healthcare system bankrupting the state, and had the audacity to say it was a model for the nation until after Obamacare passed. Then he got rid of that claim from his book.
And that is a key part. Rick Perry never said the Texas way should be the American way and has a history of supporting other states’ rights to deal with immigration in the way those states want while Mitt Romney wrote in his book that the Massachusetts plan could be a model for the nation. Then, when the paperback version came out after Obamacare came into being modeled on Romneycare, Mitt Romhey deleted those lines from the paperback version of his book.
You may not like Rick Perry’s immigration position, but he’s never said, nor would he ever say that it should be national policy. It just happened to be the right fix for Texas. You may not like Mitt Romney’s healthcare position, but he put it in his book that it was a model for the nation and it just so happens to be the model Barack Obama used.
That is a significant and profound difference in my mind and one that is overshadowed by the present Perry pile on in the debates.
Rick Perry should apologize for saying those of us who disagree don’t have a heart. I hope he will. That was baseless demagoguery against his own base of supporters. Mitt Romney has made it clear he will not apologize for what factually was the foundation of Obamacare.
Socialized medicine will generally go broke and collapse before socialism loving amigos will change their voting behavior. But either is likely to cause trouble for a long, long time.
Rick Perry on the US Mexico Border with Greta Part 1
Rick Perry on the US Mexico Border with Greta Part 2
Cain's immigration policies are almost identical to Perrys.
In a final op-ed, Herman Cain noted his opposition to the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration reform plan and noted four things that congress could do concerning immigration. These items were to secure the borders convincingly, expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants, establish a reliable legal immigrant identification program and then propose a reasonable program for the 12 million (and counting) illegal persons who broke our laws to get here, but not amnesty.
In additional interviews, Mr Cain stated that comprehensive immigration reform was a "do nothing" policy which would not solve the problem of illegal immigration. He stated that a Cain administration would do three things: secure the border; enforce the laws; promote the existing path to citizenship.
We won’t have to choose between two crap sandwiches when Palin jumps in...
Honestly, who in the race doesn’t have problems?
I’d vote for any of them over Obama, but it’s not the strongest team.
Oh, well.
I wouldn’t count on it.
The problem with Palin is she’s avoiding the contest.
Unlike Perry and Romney - Cain has unquestionable conservative credentials.
Erick Erickson has become a joke. Does anyone actually pay attention to him any more?
$100,000 benefit was a Romney lie.
Those kids of illegals are not going to U of Texas, A&M or Texas Tech.
They are going to community colleges and less expensive colleges. They are getting a $100 or more off their tuition.
Texas is not the only state with in-state tuition to kids of illegals who have lived in the state for 3 yrs or more.
I’ve read about many of Perry’s actions and inactions on illegal aliens and no amount of spin makes him look like anything more than another Texas governor who’d be as weak on immigration as his predecessor in Austin.
Border state politicians cannot be trusted on immigration issues: both Bushes, McCain, Kyl, Hutchinson, Perry and others. Do we even need to discuss California polticians?
Romney’s healthcare position makes him un-American.
Perry’s illegal immigration position makes him a scofflaw.
These two personages have contempt for us and should be shunned and ignored.
You might be a bit surprised about Cain.
And with a strong Republican majority in the House and one expected in the Senate, the most critical question is:
Would a new Republican president truly implement strong new immigration legislation a new Congress is likely to pass?
We saw what border state W did with the Secure Fence Act of 2006. We need a non-border state president who’ll implement good laws passed by Congress rather than use every ruse in the book to avoid implementing as W did.
Congress will likely take the lead on immigration after January 2013. We need a president who’ll work with Congress on this issue, or follow its lead.
Say no to both...
Romney endorsed amnesty too.
Perry is a big-government porker in TX.
Vote for Herman Cain.
The story of American jobs and labor is deeply intertwined with predatory Federal, state and local taxation and regulation....
South Koreans sleep soundly on their border with NORKS because of American Taxpayer dollars and the American GI.
Why can’t Texans, New Mexicans, Arizonans and Californians?....BECAUSE
Illegal immigration is THE KEY to the perpetuation of the status quo in DC......
Predatory tax and regulatory policies-actions that basically serve to perpetuate and grow governments-leave what business is left in the country seeking disposable labor.
Illegal Labor is the Feds out for preserving the status quo regarding Taxes and Regulation. Interestingly, that is WHY the Feds encourage in-state tuition etc for illegals under-the-table -their presence providing disposable labor allows Federal, State and local regulatory and tax excess in the status quo to continue
Immigration is the ultimate litmus test as to the candidates in question commitment to meaningful regulatory and tax reform. If they are wishy-washy on the subject...they have no real intent to disturb the DC status quo...no matter how big their cowboy hat and six-gun.
Real”leadership” is that which will place Flyover Country’s interest ahead of the Feds....haven’t yet seen anything meaningful anywhere from anybody to indicate that might happen. We have just one more election cycle to make that happen via rule of law. Otherwise its the end of the run for America.
I don't know about that. I can think of two border state governors who would tackle the border security problem ... and both are women.
Perry has by far done more about the border and illegals than Bush. Perry’s record is not what I would like it to be, but it has been an improvement.
Part of the problem is the legislature, which would have overridden Perry on the tuition issue even if he had vetoed it. The legislature also refuses to support e-verify. It is likely that Perry would support e-verify if there were a chance of it passing, but his views on the tuition issue probably haven’t changed.
Sounds like all Texas politicians are controlled by either ethnic groups (e.g. La Raza) or companies that are looking for cheap illegal labor (e.g. Bob Perry Homes and Pilgrim’s Pride Poultry).
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.