Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VegasBaby
Why can't you just face reality? There is no appreciable difference between what is being debated now and what Romney advocated. None.

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.

87 posted on 05/21/2007 3:35:21 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Any politician who supports amnesty is deader politically than Teddy Kennedy's liver...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]


To: EternalVigilance
**yawn** You can repost it all you want, but Romney never said he endorsed McCain's bill--even back then. It's right there in your post. Furthermore, Romney has never said he would never allow illegal immigrants to eventually apply for citizenship, only that it should be done legally and fairly, not giving them any preferential treatment over those who have lawfully waited their turns. To do so would be rewarding illegals for blatantly breaking the law. I still don't see his statements back then being inconsistent with what he's saying now. You obviously feel differently and that's your right, but I just don't happen to agree.
89 posted on 05/21/2007 3:46:07 PM PDT by VegasBaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: EternalVigilance

Eternal Vigilance

I get more e-mails over you, just because I like Romney. What are you a one man army against Romney? Anyway, I prefer not to get e-mails one way or the other over what Eternal Vigilance does or does not do in Free Republic. I don’t mean they come from Eternal Vigilance, I mean they come from others, and well I tire of them.

I respectfully agree, to disagree or agree with Eternal Vigilance.

You know , Eternal Vigilance, Romney is moving ahead in the polls, and the others are falling behind. Fred hasn’t put his hat into the race. :-) You must be doing something wrong.


92 posted on 05/21/2007 4:14:39 PM PDT by AmericanMade1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson