Thread: Romney will push immigration reform, Giuliani says

Originally Posted by Buzzm1

get over yourself dumkoff... my reading comprehension is 100% ... it's Romney's statement that is the problem .. Romney's statement is taken at face value ... he doesn't mention E-Verify ... Romney says again:

"Mitt Romney will develop an effective, mandatory employment verification system that will enable employers to be sure that those they hire are eligible to work."

"will develop" infers that a system, in your case, E-Verify, doesn't yet exist.

Romney has the nickname "FLIP FLOP" Romney, for good reason

take it up with Romney

We can do without the name calling. Exactly what do you think E-Verify is? It's an employment verification system that will enable employers to be sure that those they hire are eligible to work. End of discussion because we're going in circles and you're not understanding what I'm attempting to tell you. Romney supports making E-Verify mandatory nationally and he has said as much repeatedly. He's very clear on that position.

Buzz, do you trust Roy Beck of NumbersUSA?

Excerpt:

Romney’s Vocal E-Verify Stance Assisted Strong Arizona Win Tonight – New Poll Confirms Huge E-Verify Popularity


By Roy Beck, Updated Tuesday, February 28, 2012, 9:45 PM EDT - posted on NumbersUSA
In Arizona where immigration was near the top of voter concerns, the candidate who “owned” the E-Verify issue was bound to benefit. After last week’s debate, Romney owned it; in today’s Arizona election, he benefitted.
The reason Romney benefited was not stance but leadership.
All three Non-Paul GOP candidates (Santorum, Gingrich & Romney) have been supporting national mandatory E-Verify through the campaign. But only Romney in last week's all-important debate made sure the voters knew his position by wrapping himself in that stance (see bottom of this blog).
Not surprisingly, exit polling today found that Arizona voters most concerned about illegal immigration broke strongly for Romney, who they saw as "the mandatory E-Verify candidate." The poll results below should cause every candidate of every party for every office to consider being the "E-Verify candidate" in their race. While Romney had long been expected to win Arizona, polling showed his lead was narrowing until last week's debate performance with the powerful appeal for E-Verify.
Many pundits claimed Romney’s robust advocacy of making Arizona’s mandatory E-Verify law a model for the nation was a blunder that somehow put him on the political fringe. Paul Begala just stated on CNN that Romney in last week's debate moved "so far to the right" on immigration that he will find it very difficult to move back enough to the center in the general election.

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/n...-win-tonight-n

Worthy of a second mention:

"Not surprisingly, exit polling today found that Arizona voters most concerned about illegal immigration broke strongly for Romney, who they saw as "the mandatory E-Verify candidate." The poll results below should cause every candidate of every party for every office to consider being the "E-Verify candidate" in their race. While Romney had long been expected to win Arizona, polling showed his lead was narrowing until last week's debate performance with the powerful appeal for E-Verify."

Originally Posted by MW

We can do without the name calling.

Absolutely agree!

Originally Posted by MW

Many pundits claimed Romney’s robust advocacy of making Arizona’s mandatory E-Verify law a model for the nation was a blunder that somehow put him on the political fringe. Paul Begala just stated on CNN that Romney in last week's debate moved "so far to the right" on immigration that he will find it very difficult to move back enough to the center in the general election.

We need to realize that CNN is SO far left, that even the middle looks far right to them!!

Romney tax plan helps rich, hurts middle class-study


By Kim Dixon | Reuters – 42 mins ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican U.S. presidential challenger Mitt Romney's proposal to slash income taxes by 20 percent across the board would boost income for the wealthiest taxpayers while reducing it for the middle class, according to a nonpartisan analysis released on Wednesday.

The report by the centrist Tax Policy Center found that Romney's tax cuts would boost after-tax income by an average of 4.1 percent for those earning more than $1 million a year, while reducing by an average of 1.2 percent the after-tax income of individuals earning less than $200,000.

Tax policy and how to tame the U.S. government's budget deficit, topping $1 trillion in recent years, is a major point of contrast in the presidential race, in which Romney will face President Barack Obama on November 6.

The Romney campaign blasted the study, calling it biased and noting that one of its authors, Adam Looney, was formerly an official in Obama's Treasury Department.

"President Obama continues to tout liberal studies calling for more tax hikes and more government spending," Romney campaign spokesman Ryan Williams said.

The Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, is led by Donald Marron, a former economic official in the administration of Republican President George W. Bush.

Another of the study's authors, William Gale, was an economic adviser to Republican President George H.W. Bush.

Romney, former governor of Massachusetts and a multi-millionaire who made a fortune at private equity firm Bain Capital, has not spelled out how he would lower tax rates. He has said broadly he would cut some tax benefits for the wealthy.

Because the value of the 20-percent tax cut for richer Americans would exceed the gains they get from popular tax breaks that Romney might chop, they would see the greatest income gain from Romney's possible changes, the study said.

"We add up how much people get from the tax cuts and then add up how much can potentially be raised," from ending tax breaks, said Looney, an economist and study co-author.

TAX BREAKS AT ISSUE
About two-thirds of the $1.1 trillion in revenues that the government foregoes annually because of tax breaks would have to be curbed to fund Romney's tax cut, the analysts said.

These tax breaks include popular ones such as the mortgage interest deduction, the break for employer-provided health insurance, and credits for low- and middle-income families.

The analysis assumed elimination of tax breaks would start with the wealthy, as Romney has suggested, and that some revenue growth would come from lowering tax rates.

The revenue-boosting promise of lowering taxes, especially for the wealthy, is a hallmark of Republican tax policy, though "trickle-down" economics is disputed by many economists.

Obama has blasted Romney's tax plan for disproportionately benefiting the wealthy. On Wednesday, Obama cited the Tax Center study in attacking Romney's tax plan.

"Under my opponent's plan, guess who gets the bill for these $250,000 cuts?, you do," Obama told a campaign rally.

The tax policy debate is expected to intensify toward the end of 2012, with the expiration of lower tax rates for all Americans enacted under Republican President George W. Bush.

The Democratic-led Senate last week passed legislation extending most of those tax rates -- but not for households earning more than $250,000 a year.

The Republican-led House of Representatives will likely pass their plan to extend the current rates on Wednesday.

The dispute is not likely to be resolved until after the elections.
Romney's tax proposal also includes cutting some taxes on investment income and eliminating taxes on inherited estates.

(Reporting by Kim Dixon; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Cynthia Osterman)

Romney tax plan helps rich, hurts middle class-study - Yahoo! News

Like I said, Romney seems to be fairly strong on the issue when compared to the White House goof-balls we've had to deal with over the last two decades. I believe credit should be given when and where it is due. However, it seems some are extremely reserved at giving him any credit. Frankly, I'm a little confused on why that is. Can anyone here understand where I'm coming from?

The problem here is that if Mitt Romney does secretly support a form of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" amnesty as John McCain, Rudy GUilianni, and many liberal members of the press claim they already know about unlike us peasants out here in civilian land, then all of his other promises on illegal immigration are worthless.

We have seen that happen with many RINO Republicans serving the same Council on Foreign Relations aka Goldmann Sachs plan as Bush and Obama. A good example is Chris Christie. He ran on opposing licenses and in-state tuition for illegal aliens and he beat Jon Corzine because Corzine came out for those very items.

Then, AFTER HE WON, Chris Christie announced his support for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Amnesty for illegal aliens, which if passed would qualify illegal aliens for licenses, in-state tuition, and much much more!

So we know what the Globalist template is for their Republican puppets and the evidence suggests that Mitt Romney may well be one of those.

So sure, point out the wonderful things he has said about enforcing immigration laws and opposing the Dream Act... try to hold Romney to it... and agree with those that point out that growing evidence Romney has lied to us all are indeed very dire.

W