Posted on 02/16/2007 9:47:41 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Last weekend's Republican party convention featured Rudy Giuliani alone among the major presidential candidates, and Giuliani's people were present in significant numbers. They were aggressively meeting with legislators and delegates, engaging political operatives, and offering titles and duties to those who would commit. Rudy's speech on Saturday touched on uplifting Republcian themes, invoked the memory of Ronald Reagan, and naturally weighed in on the threat of terrorism.
Only toward the end of his remarks did he briefly touch on illegal immigration. Giuliani's message was, essentially, "well, yes, I know we have to control the border, especially now because of terrorism, but isn't it great that all these immigrants want to be in our country to work---it just shows what a great country we have".
MESSAGE TO RUDY: Republicans here will be appalled by this lack of understanding of California's illegal immigration crisis. This sounds like McCain all over again: obligatory acknowledgement of border control while ignoring the enormous costs of illegal immigration and gross violations of American law. This issue cuts across party lines. Californians---especially in San Diego---are fed up with footing the bill for healthcare, public safety, etc. (Do you know that 40% of all incarcerated illegals are in California---but we receive no assistance from the federal government or real border enforcement.)
Mitt Romney is the only major Republican candidate who is willing to be tough on this issue. It was crystal clear from Giuliani's speech what his true feelings are, and his lack of sympathy for those who must deal with the costs of illegal immigration is disturbing. If the coming California presidential primary includes even the slightest comparison between the candidates on this issue, neither McCain nor Giuliani will have a chance. Romney will then have a tremendous opportunity to capture this vote. Some may want to support Hunter or Tancredo (or Gingrich if he's on the ballot), but many who care about the issue will choose Romney because they believe he can win.
First your statements should be below the line and not appear as if they were part of the newspaper article. Next you have no proof that romney is tough on illegals, and if you do let's see the proof. Don't give me the BS he did thirty days before he left office.
LOL!!
This is exactly what drew me to Romney....after hearing Rudy out of his own mouth indorse amnesty for one and all....I'm glad to finally see this in print!
--
Those are not my statements above or below the line, they are those of the author, California State Senator Mark Wyland.
My apology. I should have provided better info on the author including his current profession if you will.
..not just Calif....Ariz and Texas and now many are migrating to many of the midwest and eastern states....it is not just a border state issue anymore......and thank God....it woke up alot of interior states
Rudy does not cut it on many issues...Flip the flop, then reinvent...
Go Duncan Hunter
My comment was about Romney. Some people on FR are clearly impossible to satisfy.
Gotcha
Either you are lying about your state of residence, or you don't follow politics very closely. I lived in Massachusetts for all but the last 5 months of Romeny's administration (I just moved to Seattle), so I know what you are saying is garbage. I was also at Beacon Hill for every single rally against gay marraige held there.
Romney led the fight against gay marriage from the beginning, starting immediately after the infamous SJC decision that imposed it on the state in November of 2003. He didn't leave office until a month ago. You're telling me that three and a half years is 24 hours? Maybe in your parallel universe.
Romney immediately following the decision invoked a 70 year old hereforto unenforced law to prohibit out of state gay couples from getting liscenses, and took a lot of heat for it. For over 3 years, he pushed the legislature to approve a constitutional amendment against gay marraige, and it passed just weeks after he left office. Also over the last 3 years, he made dozens of speaches against gay marraige and wrote several op-ed pieces. Gay marriage will soon be history in Massachusetts after the voters approve the Amendment, and Romney will deserve much of the credit for that.
It's sickening to see so many fellow conservatives failing to give credit where it is due.
You said it, brother. I think conservatives will get it sooner or later. Romney is by far our best bet.
You shouldn't be. It's quite sound. But don't take my word for it; please do read about it.
Actually, it's a socialist disaster.
Yes, we're unappeasable. It's so unreasonable of us to demand someone who agrees with our platform instead of the platform of the Democrats.
/s
"Most of Clinton's policies are similar to most of mine." - Rudy Giuliani
"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it." - Mitt Romney
For the last time, the Supreme Judicial Court ordered the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to marry gay couples. A governor cannot legally defy a court order. If Romney had done so, he would have been impeached.
I suppose he could have followed the example of Alabama's Judge Moore, whose defiance of court orders sure did a lot of good! /sarcasm. Grow up.
Yeah! Rellying on private insurance companies to provide coverage is really socialist!
Forcing people to pay for other people's "insurance" is. Add in the billion to two billion in taxpayer's dollars that were part of RomneyCare, and YES, you have a socialist disaster.
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.