Romney For President Launches New Television Ad, "Secure Borders"

http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Television_Ad_Secure_Borders ^

[MSF BU]

I have not seen anything that bad. I’ve seen him called a flip-flopper, a draft-dodger, a champion of homosexual rights, somebody who opposed Reagan, etc. Those are all clearly supportable though.

[Westbrook]

> Well, no, they will just shift to say it when the
> illegals refuse to come forward for the ID cards that
> would register them into a system. Still looks like
> amnesty to me.

Well, no, they would not be able to work. Fines and asset confiscation for those that hire them.

Also, part of the six month deal, where they would be allowed to stay for six more months, is that they have to pay for their own ticket home.

[Kevmo]

Alright, that is Jim’s opinion. Give him time and think he can win over most of his critics.
***OK, I’ll give Jim time to win over most of his critics, but usually they just get zotted.

[RighteousMomma]

“Romney is dirt... He is not Duncan Hunter, who has captured the minds, hearts and imagination of America in just 27 short years in Congress.” NCTEXAN
Love your sense of humor—and irony.
I thought we were suppose to be against the Democrats not the Republicans but you certainly would not know that from most of the other posts here.
As for the poster who said Anglicanism is weird—THANK YOU for the insult. I am an evangelical Christian who has taught the Bible for 33 years and also for the last 3 months we have attended an Anglican Church. I would like for that poster to know that it is THE MOST CHRIST CENTERED CHURCH I have ever attended. Christ in me/you THE Hope of Glory.

[Kevmo]

No, I think there were stiff fines and asset confiscation involved.
***I haven’t seen that many stiff fines nor asset confiscation that anyone has to pay TODAY. If you say there WERE such penalties, they obviously weren’t enough to stop tens of millions of illegals from entering this country nor to stop employers from hiring them illegally. The last time an amnesty bill was passed, the “stiff fines and asset confiscation” provisions were gutted, but those aliens sure got their amnesty. SSDD — same stuff, different decade.

[#1CTYankee]

"If Romney leads the opposition and defeats the amnesty he will be my lifetime hero."

"ps. maybe he is reading this forum. "

op·por·tun·ism : theart, policy, or practice of taking advantage of opportunities or circumstances often with little regard for principles or consequences - op·por·tun·ist /-'tü-nist, -'tyü-/ noun or adjective

[Shazolene]

It is NOT a no-brainer.
This shows focus and PR competence.
Recognition of an issue important to his base.
And being willing and able to communicate about it.
A+

[California Patriot]

It’s worth looking into, but I’d need to know a lot more — and what he has to say about it.

[Shazolene]

Thanks for your thoughtful and informative post.
Some on this forum are setting us up for another 2006.
I can’t believe they are trashing such a good candidate.
THEY deserve President Hillary - but WE don’t!

[nowandlater]

Some conservative critics of Mitt Romney claim he ran as a liberal in his 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy for the U.S. Senate. They charge that only within the last two years has Romney attempted to build his conservative credentials in preparation for his run for the Republican nomination for U.S. President in 2008.

However, literature from the Romney campaign in 1994 reveals the truth about Romney's conservative positions on the issues in the Senate race. One campaign flyer unearthed from the 1994 race lists a side-by-side comparison of positions between Romney and Kennedy for 24 election issues. Images of the front and back of the flyer are available on the web. A closeup of the flyer with the candidate comparison on the issues is shown below:

Romney held the solid conservative position for 23 of the 24 issues listed; the only exception being the pledge to maintain the status quo in Massachusetts regarding a woman's right to choose. A pro-choice position in Massachusetts in 1994 was a socially moderate stance accommodating the large majority opinion of voters in the state. In hindsight, it was wrong for a conservative to accommodate a public pro-choice, status quo stance despite his liberal constituency. Romney freely admits now that he was wrong and has changed his position on this issue to a public pro-life stance consistent with long-held pro-life beliefs in his private life. However, it's understandable how a first-time candidate in 1994 and former businessman running a crusade for fiscal conservatism with solid conservative positions on issues of crime, welfare, foreign policy, healthcare, and congressional reform might accept the status quo on a social issue respecting the liberal constituency he would represent.

[California Patriot]

I didn’t say Robinson was stupid. “If Robinson said this, he’s wrong and simplistic.” That clearly means, he’s BEING wrong and simplistic WHEN HE SAYS THIS. I didn’t even say he’s BEING stupid. Same with “It’s not smart to lump them together.” That’s directed at a particular judgment, not a person’s mental processes as a whole.

You people, sheesh.

[Enosh]

"THEY deserve President Hillary - but WE don’t!"

Rudybot redux.

[Enosh]

"social issue respecting the liberal constituency he would represent."

So he would happily kill a baby, provided a crowd cheered him on?

Lovely.

[nowandlater]

No denying it. He was a pro-choicer.

[#1CTYankee]

"the only exception being the pledge to maintain the status quo in Massachusetts regarding a woman's right to choose. A pro-choice position in Massachusetts in 1994 was a socially moderate stance accommodating the large majority opinion of voters in the state. In hindsight, it was wrong for a conservative to accommodate a public pro-choice, status quo stance despite his liberal constituency."

So in order to get elected he betrayed he's principles, and exactltly why should I trust a man who abandons one's beliefs to get get votes?

No thanks.

[nowandlater]

I know some will never a previously abortionist in their midst. But we have welcomed them before and some of them have been very good advocates for the pro-life cause.

[Westbrook]

Maybe we’re not talking about the same thing.

I’m talking about Romney’s proposal as he presented it in an interview with Bill O’Reilley.

[nowandlater]

If you ascribe something in him which you don’t trust in him, then pick another candidate who has been pure if you wish. But you need to credit him with pro-life results:

He vetoed the bill providing state funding for human embryonic stem cell research
He vetoed a bill that provided for the “morning after pill” without a prescription because it is an abortifacient and would have been available to minors without parental notification and consent

He vetoed legislation which would have redefined Massachusetts longstanding definition of the beginning of human life from fertilization to implantation

He supported parental notification laws and opposed efforts to weaken parental involvement (campaigned on this in his 2002 Gubernatorial election)

He fought to promote abstinence education in public school classrooms with a program offered by faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. (campaigned on this in his 2002 Gubernatorial election)

---

To be fair, I am ping EV with the counter opinion of Mitt. I am not one to run away from the critics.

[LFOD777]

part of the 1986 amnesty was that there would be enforcement afterward, and it never happened

[nowandlater]

True. If Reagan didn’t do it, then who will?