Thread: We must find a way to make peace between two groups....

Originally Posted by MW

I would respecfully disagree. While Romney is not perfect on immigration, he is nowhere near Obama on the iissue (not even close). I have given my reasons for believing this in previous posts.

I agree ! With Obama,we know where he stands. With Romney,everything is speculation.As far as a third candidate goes,that ship has already sailed !!And let me reiterate,If Obama goes,so does Holder and Napolitano!!!!!

Originally Posted by anamarie

I agree ! With Obama,we know where he stands. With Romney,everything is speculation.As far as a third candidate goes,that ship has already sailed !!And let me reiterate,If Obama goes,so does Holder and Napolitano!!!!!

In the coming weeks and months, Romney will have to clarify once and for all where he stands on illegal immigration. He cannot continue to wiggle himself out of the issue or it'll harm his campaign. If he says what we want to hear, I'll force myself to vote for him, otherwise, see ya later. On the other hand, it sounds to me like some are dead set in voting for him no matter what he says. Heck even declaring support for amnesty would not be enough and that is dangerous because if these people get the sense that they don't have to be strong on illegal immigration then what's the point? Defeating Obama is good and all, but what sort of message are we sending to these fools in the long run?

Originally Posted by googler

In the coming weeks and months, Romney will have to clarify once and for all where he stands on illegal immigration. He cannot continue to wiggle himself out of the issue or it'll harm his campaign. If he says what we want to hear, I'll force myself to vote for him, otherwise, see ya later. On the other hand, it sounds to me like some are dead set in voting for him no matter what he says. Heck even declaring support for amnesty would not be enough and that is dangerous because if these people get the sense that they don't have to be strong on illegal immigration then what's the point? Defeating Obama is good and all, but what sort of message are we sending to these fools in the long run?

I agree. There are plenty of reasons to reject amnesty and if he can't do that at least, then I can't vote for him. I need some direct quotes about this whole illegals in the military thing before I reject him on that basis, it sounds like a bogus accusation. But it could cover for the problem of allowing non-citizens into the military, which is enough of a problem and needs to be shut down. His choice of a VP might be another reason I reject him.

Originally Posted by googler

In the coming weeks and months, Romney will have to clarify once and for all where he stands on illegal immigration.

Even if he announces that he is strongly opposed to illegal aliens who knows if he can be trusted to keep to that once he is elected.

Originally Posted by artclam

Even if he announces that he is strongly opposed to illegal aliens who knows if he can be trusted to keep to that once he is elected.

That could be said about anyone. That's why it's important to review his previous history as a legislator. While serving as Gov. he vetoed a bill that would have given a tuition break to illegals, halted an attempt at giving illegals a driver's license, and attempted to make it legal for state police to question anyone suspected of being illegal which included asking them for their papers.

Originally Posted by MW

That could be said about anyone. That's why it's important to review his previous history as a legislator. While serving as Gov. he vetoed a bill that would have given a tuition break to illegals, halted an attempt at giving illegals a driver's license, and attempted to make it legal for state police to question anyone suspected of being illegal which included asking them for their papers.

But he also passed this a little doozie known as RomneyCARE in which it allowed illegal aliens in the state of Mass. to receive some form of health benefits. If he was strong against illegal aliens he would have refused to sign this into law, never mind the fact that this was a horrendous piece of legislation to begin with.

And then you have him in past interviews giving his support to amnesty at the federal level. Only reason it didn't matter then is because he wasn't President of the United States when he said it right?

You want to look at his history? Well just look at his history as a flip-flopper. It throws everything he's done in the past out the window. That right there should give you pause as to what he truly intends to do once in office.

Originally Posted by googler

But he also passed this a little doozie known as RomneyCARE in which it allowed illegal aliens in the state of Mass. to receive some form of health benefits. If he was strong against illegal aliens he would have refused to sign this into law, never mind the fact that this was a horrendous piece of legislation to begin with.

And then you have him in past interviews giving his support to amnesty at the federal level. Only reason it didn't matter then is because he wasn't President of the United States when he said it right?

You want to look at his history? Well just look at his history as a flip-flopper. It throws everything he's done in the past out the window. That right there should give you pause as to what he truly intends to do once in office.

Just for the sake of facts .......... the Massachusetts health care law didn’t give anything new to illegal immigrants that they didn’t have before Gov. Romney signed the bill into law (no new laws were included in the bill that were specifically designed with illegal immigrants in mind). Furthermore, federal law requires all hospitals to treat illegals that seek emergency care.


Personally, I don't agree with Massachusetts health care law but for the sake of keeping the discussion honest ........ nothing new was included in the law to cover illegals that wasn't already there under the old health care law.

To my knowledge Romney has not flipped his positions on amnesty, tuition for illegals, border security, or driver's licenses for illegals. Also, let's not forget, he supported Arizona's law. Wouldn't it be nice if Obama could say the same?

Originally Posted by MW

Just for the sake of facts .......... the Massachusetts health care law didn’t give anything new to illegal immigrants that they didn’t have before Gov. Romney signed the bill into law (no new laws were included in the bill that were specifically designed with illegal immigrants in mind). Furthermore, federal law requires all hospitals to treat illegals that seek emergency care.


Personally, I don't agree with Massachusetts health care law but for the sake of keeping the discussion honest ........ nothing new was included in the law to cover illegals that wasn't already there under the old health care law.

To my knowledge Romney has not flipped his positions on amnesty, tuition for illegals, border security, or driver's licenses for illegals. Also, let's not forget, he supported Arizona's law. Wouldn't it be nice if Obama could say the same?

That was the excuse Romney's campaign used right? That it was already in the old health care law, so Romney couldn't have POSSIBLY done anything about it. Well he could have introduced a provision to deny coverage to illegals. But no, at that time it was not political expediant to do so, he wasn't running for President so why go through the trouble. Federal law requires illegals be attended to in the ER, but it says nothing about providing other health care services such as those provided by clinics.


Regarding Arizona's law, has he finally taken a position on the Supreme Court's decision to strike down three of the provisions in the law he supposedly supported, but that he probably wants to distance himself from now? Instead he makes generic statements about state rights without ever directly addressing Arizona's law.




And here's him back then on comprehensive immigration reform. A man short on principles it seems.


Mitt Romney Supported Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants - YouTube




In conclusion, he's all over the place on illegal immigration and so we cannot exactly find comfort in that if he's elected President he will be strong on the issue.


As I've said, he'll need to address this issue soon, but don't be surprised if he says something you don't want to hear, I know I won't.




And I don't care about Obama. The only good thing he's done was voicing support for gay marriage and even then why did he wait so long? Ah, but of course, because it's politically convenient. He's failed on everything else, so no one here is voting for him. I'm focused on Romney and the Republican party's complete and utter inability to stand on principle.


The lesser of two evils mentality is frankly getting annoying and tiresome and what is driving this country into a ditch.

Last POTUS election, I held on to voting for "principal" and voted for Chuck Baldwin. If I could have built a perfect constitutional candidate, it would have been him. Yeah, I knew he didn't stand a chance, but I also knew McStain didn't either. It was obvious Barakula would win.

This time it's different. People are PISSED off at Obama, I can't think of one person in my circle of friends and family that approve of anything he's done. Romney has a chance, and I feel WE have a better chance of him listening to us if we scream loud enough. Obama just does what ever he damn well feels like and I really resent that. I will hold my nose and vote for Romney.

Although I don't agree with his positions on immigration, I feel he can and will listen and he's got the experience of a business person to run this county like a business. The economy is a shambles and we need that experience right now.

Gay marriage, abortion, etc...they are all "wedge" issues and truthfully don't matter a tinkers dam to someone who is out of work and/or competing with illegals for scarce jobs!

Originally Posted by SicNTiredInSoCal

Last POTUS election, I held on to voting for "principal" and voted for Chuck Baldwin. If I could have built a perfect constitutional candidate, it would have been him. Yeah, I knew he didn't stand a chance, but I also knew McStain didn't either. It was obvious Barakula would win.

This time it's different. People are PISSED off at Obama, I can't think of one person in my circle of friends and family that approve of anything he's done. Romney has a chance, and I feel WE have a better chance of him listening to us if we scream loud enough. Obama just does what ever he damn well feels like and I really resent that. I will hold my nose and vote for Romney.

Although I don't agree with his positions on immigration, I feel he can and will listen and he's got the experience of a business person to run this county like a business. The economy is a shambles and we need that experience right now.

Gay marriage, abortion, etc...they are all "wedge" issues and truthfully don't matter a tinkers dam to someone who is out of work and/or competing with illegals for scarce jobs!

Barakula. Lol. Had to explain to my friends what I was laughing at. Thanks. I think I'll use that one.

Anyways. Most of the people in my school would have turned their back on Obama had Ron Paul been given the chance to run against him. It is clear they are disappointed in his stance on drugs and the wars overseas which are costing us billions of tax dollars and blood. We on the other hand are tired of his entire presidency and so we have at least one thing in common.

But for the love of god, we cannot go from a socialist president to one that will run this country like a "business". He'll drive it into the ground all in the name of appeasing our foreign creditors in China and Saudi Arabia. We'd go from one extreme to the other and that is not what this country needs. And last time I checked, many businesses hire cheap illegal/legal labor all in the name of cutting costs because that's what running a business is all about. This ends up screwing the American worker. Wouldn't be hard to believe Romney has this in his head somewhere and hence his terrible position on illegal immigration.