Oblivious as always, EV, hunkered in his bunker somewhere, its cement walls festooned with posters depicting Mitt as Satan, has re-posted some tired old info from 13 years ago.
Great work EV, you must take great pride in your anti-Mitt accomplishments. If it is your avocation, it is certainly a peculiar one, if vocation they are paying you too much.
Did you support the Contract with America, Plutarch? What is your opinion of what Romney said?
And I'm glad he has.
Unfortunately, it's another flip-flop. And from not that long ago:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/16/romneys_words_grow_hard_on_immigration/
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. "These people contribute in many cases to our economy and to our society," he said. "In some cases, they do not. But that's a whole group we're going to have to determine how to deal with."
So 18 months ago Romney was parsing amnesty the same way that McCain was (and still is).