Skip to comments.Articles on Romney and immigration are being falsely posted
Posted on 06/15/2012 3:48:58 PM PDT by Signalman
This article was posted with a false headline and a false premise:
The article was posted on FR with the title:
Romney on Immigration: "I happen to agree with Marco Rubio."
But the actual title of the article is:
Romney: Obama immigration move makes long term fix harder
If you read the article, it says that Romney said:
I would like to seek legislation that deals with this issue and I happen agree with Marco Rubio as he looked at, considered this issue, he said that this is an important matter that we have to find a long term solution," Romney said.
So Romney is not agreeing with Obama on this and he's only agreeing with Rubio's comment that "There has to be a long term solution". Read the article.
Maybe you should apprise the Moderators of this title fakery.
You know.. instead of posting a whole thread about it.
Where you will be mercilessly mocked.
Merciless mockery in 3.. 2.. 1...
Let’s forget it, better still....
See the little ‘Report Abuse’ button. Try it out.
By the way, it looks like the mods already fixed that article, but if it was mistitled like you said, the posters dishonesty speaks for itself. That is playing MSM type games.
The thing is, many who responded to the article were reacting extremely negatively to Romney’s supposed position based on the headline. When you read the article, though, it paints a completely different picture of what Romney’s position is. So it was rather misleading.
From the article:
Romney said - I believe the status of young people who come here through no fault of their own is an important matter to be considered, and should be solved on a long term basis so they know what their future would be in this country.
Romney said - I’m worried about the youngsters here. They’re bright, they can help carry this country forward in a way previous generations have and I think they do need some assistance and some recognition for the work they are doing in school.
Romney said - I’m delighted with the idea that people (illegals) who come to this country and wish to serve in the military can be given a path to become permanent residents of this country.
Romney quoted - Rubio has already offered his own version of the act that would not provide citizenship, but instead give legal status for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States by their parents when they were minors.
And that’s just this article.
You are right, but the way things are going, people would respond that way no matter what the title said.
“I believe the status of young people who come here through no fault of their own is an important matter to be considered, and should be solved on a long term basis so they know what their future would be in this country,” Romney said after a campaign stop in Milford, New Hampshire.
I see nothing wrong with that.
“I think the action that the president took today makes it more difficult to reach that long term solution because an executive order is, of course, a short term matter and can be reversed by subsequent presidents,” Romney said.
So Romney, is in no way, agreeing with Obama’s action, today.
The article also stated:
“Romney has not come out in support of Rubio’s measure, saying only that the two have spoken about the proposed legislation.”
You’re right, Romney’s agreeing with Rubio that Obama’s actions don’t go far enough: they’re outflanking him on the left!
No reference to Obama’s overreach of power or that any amnesty is just wrong.
See post 10.
Correction, post 11.
The point wasn’t that, it was the falsification of the title that the poster of this thread accused. If what he said is true, it was a dishonest change.
Sorry, I was meaning to post that to the one right before yours.
In December, Romney said he would veto the DREAM Act if he were president, saying instead he would support a path to residency not citizenship for those who served in the military, but not other DREAM Act proposals.[...]
"I'm delighted with the idea that people who come to this country and wish to serve in the military can be given a path to become permanent residents of this country," he said. "For those who come here illegally, the idea of giving them in-state tuition credits or other special benefits I find to be contrary to the idea of a nation of law."
Rubio has already offered his own version of the act that would not provide citizenship, but instead give legal status for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States by their parents when they were minors.Added for context.
Romney has not come out in support of Rubio's measure, saying only that the two have spoken about the proposed legislation.
"He [Rubio] and I have spoken about his thinking on his version of a different act than the DREAM Act that's been proposed in the Senate," Romney said in April at a campaign event in Pennsylvania.
He continued, "The one that's been proposed in the Senate creates a new category of citizenship for certain individuals. The Senator's proposal does not create that new category but instead provides visas for those that have come into the country that came in as young people with their families."
I am going to say here what I said on the other thread:
“Not surprised Romney agrees with amnesty, that’s been his position all along”.
Romney is for ‘comprehesive immigration reform’ code phrase for amnesty. Rubio from the beginning was for amnesty. He only tempered his remarks with his sights eventually on the White House.
So, some anti-Romney Freeper is using a typical smear tactic of the left to slander a candidate they hate? I’m not surprised.
Apparently that is the "severely" conservative position. Go figure.
If O actually cared about DREAM on the merits instead of as a cynical electoral cudgel against the GOP, he would have let Rubio float his own DREAM bill to try to shake some Republican support loose. The bill might have passed with Democratic support; even if it didnt, Obama would have been in a better position at that point to act unilaterally since there would already be multiple Republicans on record as supporting the basics of DREAM (even if they opposed unilateral executive action). But he couldnt afford to let Rubio take the lead lest the publicity surrounding that jeopardize Obamas huge lead over the GOP among Latinos. So, just as he did with gay marriage, he cynically decided that now was the moment for a pure, bold, crystalline pander to one of the Democrats core client constituencies.
But I dont know, maybe Im underestimating him. As I say, now that a de facto DREAM amnesty is in effect, the politics of this have changed. If theres any tried and true principle in the entitlement age, its that most politicians are deathly afraid to take something away from a group once its been granted especially a group whose electoral power is increasing. Will President Romney or a Republican Congress really be willing to undo this when given the chance? At best, I think they might be willing to replace it with a new DREAM Act of their own, but unless theres a ferocious backlash among the rest of the electorate, Im skeptical that pulling the plug is an option.
This seems to be Mutt’s MO — claiming he wouldn’t support legislation such as the DREAM Act and claiming that he’d repeal Zerocare — only to say Republicans should propose their own DREAM Act and he’d replace parts of Zerocare with health legislation he likes.
Slightly slower path to the train wreck. Mutt loves him some statism.
And we care about the Republican establishment thinks - why?
Or if this is the establishment postilion, why didn’t it pass?
But ok, either way I do not agree, and my statement is not incorrect.
“should be solved on a long term basis so they know what their future would be in this country”
That’s the part of Willard’s quote I have a problem with.
If what he really said was “should be solved on a long term basis so they know what their future would be in THEIR OWN COUNTY, NOT OURS, AND THEREFORE ON MY FIRST DAY IN OFFICE I WILL RESCIND THIS INSANITY OF OBUMMERS AND ORDER THAT THEY BE REPATRIOTED TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN”, then I would have no problem with it.
I don’t like open-borders types whether they prefer a D after their names or an R.
Stop trying to cover for that pandering liberal. I don't need a reporter to interpret Romney's remarks for me. I heard what he said (and what you re-posted here).
It's a mealy-mouthed way of saying that he wants the same thing as Obama and Rubio, except he'd like to see it done through congressional legislation instead of by executive fiat.
He's as much for illegal immigration as the Democrats, and if you truly believe otherwise, you're going to be sorely disappointed in the future, because he WILL come out in full support of it at some point.
This is the best Romney can Do! God Help Us all !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.