Monday, November 28, 2011

Right Wingnut Is Right

It's not often I get to say that, so I decided to give RW some backing in a separate post. It is also not often that I write a post and then have it validated the very next day. If I were any less humble, I would say, "I told you so." Wink.

But I want to ask my fellow Rombots a few questions.

1. Will you admit that Romney supported amnesty?

2. Will you admit that Romney probably doesn't really think we should just starve the illegal immigrants out of our country like rats?

3. Will you admit that in Romney's head, he probably does want some kind of amnesty for at least a portion of illegal immigrants?

4. Will you admit that if he does, it would be a very sensible policy?

5. Will you admit that Newt's immigration policy is both sensible and similar to the immigration policy that Mitt used to support (and still supports in his head)?

Yes, I admit to all of them. But here is the kicker: I still am going to vote for Romney and would never under any circumstances cast a vote for Newt Gingrich. Romney would make a great president and Newt would make a lousy one. I have and will continue to spell this out. But this particular round goes to Newt. This may mean that I am a terrible team player, but my ultimate allegiance is to truth. Besides, I am well aware that nobody will listen to me if I refuse to come to grips with obvious stuff like this. Sometimes you have to concede a point in order to win a broader argument. I can remember writing an article at Rightosphere entitled, "I Support Mitt Romney despite..." Maybe we all need to go through that practice again.

The bottom line is that if I can admit that Right Wingnut is right about something - and yes, the words come bitter in my mouth - then we can all be little more open minded.

15 comments:

Slick-Willy said...

Yes, he (and you and others) are winning me over on the immigration argument. I'm not sure what position Mitt needs to take, but he needs to outline it FIRMLY. And he can't go any further to the right than he currently has.

Anonymous said...

Pablo,

I think Romney has been consistent on immigration policy, but I don't think he really get's hot and bothered about it. I can't understand why he is choosing to use it, when other issues are better against Newt and Perry.

No, I don't think he wants to treat illegals poorly, and kick them all out.

Yes, I admit that Romney would want to solve immigration sensibly, and that his position is probably pretty close to Newts.

-Martha

Graham said...

It comes back to the fact that Romney's not a perfect conservative, and I admit that. If I'm admitting the stuff in Pablo's post, well then, so be it. Wish it weren't the case, but whatever.

It doesn't negate the fact that Romney's skillset and experience are best suited for the problems we face right now, and he's the best man for the job.

I'll vote for that all day long.

craigs said...

Well, I have a mixed reaction.
1. I don't think Romney ever wanted to send buses to pick up 11 mm illegals and take them back to wherever.
2. I do think the law is the law, just as it was 25 years ago when illegals broke it
3 I do think that legal immigrants shouldn't be punished by waiting while illegals get their card punched because they have managed to stay hidden for 25 years
4 I also believe it is a Pandoras box to start weighing how long you have been illegal. 25 years ...O.K
20 years......maybe O.K, 15 years. Hmmmm
10 years, I don't know. 5 years, out........so a blanket waiver for all IS amnesty and some community agency to ferry out who stays and who goes is unworkable for obvious reasons
Having said that, perhaps a $ 5,000 fine and a 5 year probation for illegals and a complete rework of the current immigration system to accelerate immigration legally with expedited processing for college grads might work

CraigS

Anonymous said...

Dan had some great ideas about how to solve the problem. There are numerous options without deporting, which is absurd and crazy talk. Michelle Bachmann is out today saying send them all home. I guess she thinks it makes a good soundbite.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

I'm not sure where I stand on the issue, but I've come to realize that if we do nothing, millions of illegals will continue to get a pass. Securing the border is the FIRST step. That way, these propoals can't be characterized as magnets. As for Mitt...I believe Newt has backed him into a corner on this issue. His campaign won't get away with repeating the same talking points for the duration of the campaign.

Slick-Willy said...

Exactly. The key for Mitt is to take a firm and clear stand. Mitt's positions on this have been ARGUABLY consistent, but they're sufficiently non committal to limit certainty about what he really wants to do.

Newt's position is clear--amnesty for those here 25 years+ and possibly for anyone with "strong ties" to the USA. But naturally, he isn't calling it amnesty.

Romney needs to be more clear. His wishy washy attitude on this (and other issues) is hurting him. He needs to take a stand that people can identify or he'll be viewed as wishy washy. Big shocker.

Anonymous said...

All Romney needs to say is his focus is on making sure that the law is being enforced and the magnets are gone. From there policies can be put in place for those here but to create a policy before that's done which is what Speaker Gingrich is doing? Well, the burden should be on him to explain what his policy WHICH IS AMNESTY will look like. He's already stated that time here, family status, and religious background are criteria. For me, I'm not there but I will say that dealing with the 11 million people who are already here after the borders and magnets are fixed is a topic I would address as President immediately after. Do I want to round up 11 million people and send them home? No. Am I willing to allow them an opportunity to move to the front of the line because they're here illegally? No.

FastFacts said...

Hey Pablo, sadly you are ignorant of Romney's immigration stance because you listen to the media instead of looking at the whole clip, any clip. He has misquoted so many times. He has actually been consistent on this since 1994 when running against Ted Kennedy, watch the debate on C-SPAN, it is there for all to see. What about the fact that he created the Arizona law in 2006.

Here is Romney's consistent stance on immigration through the years: http://www.thedailycandidate.com/projects/nov/stimulus/stimulus_forum.html

2. He agreed that we should keep emergency health for those that need it but they need to go home.

3. He has been completely consistent that wants 'no special treatment to those that came illegally, but that they should get in line. You miss the part about going home.

4. Question for you, should it be 25 years, 20, 15, 10, 5, how many years and is it sensible to say someone that is 24 years shouldn't be allowed to stay. How do you prove how long they have been here?

5. Take away the magnets and enforce the laws and they will go home. The rest of them. A part of Newt's plan might work, if it doesn't become part of a magnet.

IGNORANCE IS BLISS FOR YOU, ISN'T IT

marK said...

"1. Will you admit that Romney supported amnesty?"

First define exactly what you mean by amnesty. What is it, and what is it not?

Is it what Ronald Reagan did and grant everyone who is here illegally citizenship?

Is it any pathway at all for the illegals to eventually becomes citizens?

If someone does not support amnesty, must they then support a "one strike and you're out" rule? If someone is ever here illegally, are they forever barred from being citizens? Is that the definition of "no amnesty"?

So what exactly is meant by the word "amnesty"? What is exactly meant by "no amnesty"?

Until one defines this, then there really isn't much of a point to be arguing about it, is there?

leighrow said...

I believe in attrition through enforcement. Enforce the border and the laws and see how that helps. Any discussion of amnesty just encourages more illegals to cross the border.

Terrye said...

No, I don't think Romney ever supported amnesty...and as for Gingrich he has supported all sorts of stuff over the years so there is no way of knowing what he actually supports right now or if is workable or realistic.

FastFacts said...

Did you see HotAir.com tried to pass this off as fact (that Romney supported amnesty) they were emailed by readers until they had to retract the deceptive clip about Romney and amnesty. They now have the whole clip and have denied that Romney wanted amnesty.

This comes to show that Romney does not want amnesty and again your ignorance is bliss???

Doug NYC GOP said...

Another Newt Gingrich Flip Flop

Here is an interview from 2006/07, where in the former speakers says ALL illegals need to go home first…..

http://rightwingnews.com/interviews/gingrich.php

But hey he’s not Romney, so he can “Oooops… what a little mistake that was!”

Ohio JOE said...

"but my ultimate allegiance is to truth" This funny one made my day.