Thread: Romney: Need long term solution for children of illegals... Those in military OK

So what we got from Romney on "Face the Nation" is that he supports giving illegals permanent residence for those in the military. We've already known this, at least I did, but just in case some of you didn't (if you didn't, you should really do your research on this guy) the quote of his is below.

Anyways, this is about the third time he talks about this so called "long term solution" for children of illegals. He is set to speak to a group of Latinos sometime this week or next week, can't remember, but I'm wondering if he is preparing to make public some sort of proposal to aide these children. It really sounds to me like this "long term solution" has nothing to do with having them go back to their home countries and get in the back of the line. He is going to give them some sort of free pass. But eh, who cares right? Romney is still better than Obama and I'm just an Obama supporter blah blah blah, yea I get it (sigh).

Here's a transcript of that portion of the interview:

BOB SCHIEFFER: The President said, Friday, the government will no longer seek to deport eight hundred thousand of these young illegal immigrants who were brought into this country by their parents. I think you said this is just a short-term solution to a long-term problem, but would you repeal this order if you became President?


MITT ROMNEY: Well, let's step back and-- and look at the issue. I mean, first of all, we have to secure the border. We need to have an employment verification system to make sure that those that are working here in this country are here legally and then with regards to these kids who were brought in by their parents through no fault of their own, there needs to be a long-term solution so they know what their status is. This is something Congress has been working on, and I thought we are about to see some proposals brought forward by Senator Marco Rubio and by Democrat senators, but the President jumped in and said I'm going to take this action. He called it a stopgap measure. I-- I don't know why he feels stopgap measures are the right way to go and he--


BOB SCHIEFFER (voice overlapping): Well, what would you do about it?


MITT ROMNEY: Well, as-- as you know, he was-- he was President for the last three and a half years, did nothing on immigration. Two years, he had a Democrats' House in Senate, did nothing of permanent or-- or long-term basis. What I would do is I'd make sure that by coming into office I would work with Congress to put in place a long-term solution for the-- for the children of those that-- that have come here illegally--


BOB SCHIEFFER (voice overlapping): Would you--


MITT ROMNEY: --and I've said, for instance, that-- that those who served in the military, I would give permanent residents, too.


BOB SCHIEFFER: Sure, but would you repeal this?


MITT ROMNEY: Well, it would be overtaken by events, if you will, by virtue of my putting in place a long-term solution with-- with legislation which creates law that relates to these individuals, such that they know what their-- their stat-- setting is going to be--


BOB SCHIEFFER (voice overlapping): But would--


MITT ROMNEY: --not just-- not-- not just for the term of the President, but on a permanent basis.


BOB SCHIEFFER: I-- I won't keep on about this but just to-- to make sure I understand, would you leave this in place while you worked out a long-term solution or would you just repeal it?


MITT ROMNEY: We'll-- we'll look at that-- we'll look at that setting as we-- as we reach that. But my anticipation is, I'd come into office and say we need to get this done on a long-term basis, not this kind of a stopgap measure. What-- what the President did, he-- he should have worked on this years ago. If he felt seriously about this, he should have taken action when he had a Democrat House and Senate, but he didn't. He saves these sort of things until four and a half months before the general election.


BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, why did you think he did that?


MITT ROMNEY: Well, I-- I think the timing is-- is pretty clear. If he-- if he really wanted to make a solution that dealt with these kids or with the illegal immigration in America, then this is something he would have taken up in his first three and a half years, not in his last few months.


BOB SCHIEFFER: So he did it for politics?

Source:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162...aham-gov-dean/

Please post the source article link for this transcript.

Originally Posted by HAPPY2BME

Please post the source article link for this transcript.

Forgot to do that. Thanks for the reminder.

Originally Posted by googler

Anyways, this is about the third time he talks about this so called "long term solution" for children of illegals. He is set to speak to a group of Latinos sometime this week or next week, can't remember, but I'm wondering if he is preparing to make public some sort of proposal to aide these children. It really sounds to me like this "long term solution" has nothing to do with having them go back to their home countries and get in the back of the line. He is going to give them some sort of free pass. But eh, who cares right? Romney is still better than Obama and I'm just an Obama supporter blah blah blah, yea I get it (sigh).

It always seems like an enigma when one is not certain what one may do in terms of policy during a campaign. Perhaps he is considering the problem from all points of view rather than jumping on the band wagon and announcing an absolute dictum at this stage. A pragmatic solution may or may not be in the works....we may have to bide our time on this.

googler, your campaign against Romney which appears to be mostly speculation is really starting to get under my skin. I honestly think you take pleasure in irritating ALIPAC Romney supporters. Romney has said repeatedly that he is against amnesty. The only hint that he would support legalizing any illegals is his comments regarding those that serve in the military, which is a moot point because illegals aren't serving in the military. I haven't seen him actually say he would support any Dream Act plan, not even Rubio's. He did say he expected plans to be offered for consideration but I have not heard him say he would support any of them 100%. How do you know his long term solution isn't to send the so-called dreamers home with their parents? Let's be honest, you don't really know but certainly like to speculate.

Furthermore, this interview has already been posted. Your constant bashing a rehashing is quickly becoming very devisive around here (IMO). Perhaps, for the sake of unity, you should hold off on the speculation and wait until you actually have some concrete information that shows Romney is an Obama twin on the immigration issue.

I keep trying to feel you out for who you're supporting but your not saying. I could be wrong but I suspect you're a Paul supporter. Together we stand or divided we fall!

Originally Posted by AZres

It always seems like an enigma when one is not certain what one may do in terms of policy during a campaign. Perhaps he is considering the problem from all points of view rather than jumping on the band wagon and announcing an absolute dictum at this stage. A pragmatic solution may or may not be in the works....we may have to bide our time on this.

Well stated, AZres. Everyone seems to expect an answer to Obama's policy yesterday. I say let's keep the pressure on Romney and wait for his position to become clear. Without a doubt though, I just don't see how Romney could do anything worse than what Obama has been doing for the last 3 1/2 years. One thing is clear, Romney has said repeatedly that he does not support amnesty for illegals.

MITT ROMNEY: Well, it would be overtaken by events, if you will, by virtue of my putting in place a long-term solution with-- with legislation which creates law that relates to these individuals, such that they know what their-- their stat-- setting is going to be--

Long term solution could mean any number of things from worst case scenario- amnesty--- Or best case scenario- sending the illegal kids and parents back to their parents' country of origin. Their "status" or "setting" may just be outside the borders of the USA.

Working on pragmatic solution, some say? Mumbo, jumbo political talk for not quite sure which way the political winds are blowing, IMO. Romney has been campaigning since before the last presidential election. If he is not sure what he stands for now after duration of that much time, how much information does he need to know what he stands for, unless it is more information whcih way is the forceful winds are blowing from today?

Just say what you beleive is the next right thing, he may win me over! I want to know if his principles are based upon good forAmericans and the nation! I want to know today, not the day after inauguration.

Originally Posted by MW

googler, your campaign against Romney which appears to be mostly speculation is really starting to get under my skin. I honestly think you take pleasure in irritating ALIPAC Romney supporters. Romney has said repeatedly that he is against amnesty. The only hint that he would support legalizing any illegals is his comments regarding those that serve in the military, which is a moot point because illegals aren't serving in the military. I haven't seen him actually say he would support any Dream Act plan, not even Rubio's. He did say he expected plans to be offered for consideration but I have not heard him say he would support any of them 100%. How do you know his long term solution isn't to send the so-called dreamers home with their parents? Let's be honest, you don't really know but certainly like to speculate.

Furthermore, this interview has already been posted. Your constant bashing a rehashing is quickly becoming very devisive around here (IMO). Perhaps, for the sake of unity, you should hold off on the speculation and wait until you actually have some concrete information that shows Romney is an Obama twin on the immigration issue.

I keep trying to feel you out for who you're supporting but your not saying. I could be wrong but I suspect you're a Paul supporter. Together we stand or divided we fall!

I'm sorry, but you are dead wrong with your opinion on me. I do not take pleasure when I attempt to expose truths behind a candidates position and then get attacked for doing so and labeled as an Obama supporter. Do you think you'd find pleasure in that? ....Didn't think so.

And you are missing a key point in the whole military issue. Currently, illegals with fraudulent papers make up an insignificant portion of the military, but he supports a portion of the DREAM act which would allow those not already in the military to sign up for service and get some form of residency in return.

And what good will it do to get any concrete information on what exactly this "long term solution" involves. Doesn't seem like it'll matter to you or anyone else. For me, if he can just come out and say the solution involves cutting benefits (ex. K-12 education) for them and reversing Obama's latest move, then I'll definitely reconsider him even if I disagree with his hawkish stance on foreign affairs and social issues such as gay marriage. But ideally I'd want someone else, I don't know who, to step up to the plate and stand on the principles most Americans agree on and lead an Internet movement to garner support from us young people. I know many who are simply unhappy with either of these candidates with deep pockets. We have the numbers and we can make the difference for the good of the country.

Originally Posted by googler

But ideally I'd want someone else, I don't know who, to step up to the plate and stand on the principles most Americans agree on and lead an Internet movement to garner support from us young people. I know many who are simply unhappy with either of these candidates with deep pockets. We have the numbers and we can make the difference for the good of the country.

And whom do you suggest at this stage of the game?????