Jan 07 2008
Will The Amnesty Hypochondriacs Save Romney?
Boy, Romney really is self-destructing. It seems is latest ad attack is to go after McCain for his support of the comprehensive immigration reform bill last year. The evil “amnesty” has arisen again to tear the party apart.
Romney again criticized McCain over his including “amnesty” for illegal immigrants in his legislation.
McCain replied, “I have never, ever supported amnesty and never will.”
Too funny. The immigration bill included background checks, fines and a requirement to pay all back taxes – which is an enormous financial penalty. If you have been living off a 5% tax hit and you owe 10%, then you will go from 5 to 10% (doubling your losses to taxes) and begin working off the years you missed. That can triple the tax burden you pay to the IRS every month.
But this penalty has never been enough for the amnesty hypochondriacs. They like to pretend the fight was over everything BUT the amnesty issue they raise (like double verses single fences). But we all know which word is used to make people react like Pavlov’s dog, and that word is “amnesty”.
Mitt is trying to enrage the purity wars so he can win in NH. That is one of the best examples of why emotion should not drive strategies – it can screw you up royally. In an election where the people don’t want to be held hostage to the fringes, Romney goes to the fringes. In an election were people want to find unity instead of ideological purity, Romney goes to the purity. And he does this in one of the most independent minded states in the country.
No wonder McCain did not back down. We will see once again how the fear mongering of “amnesty” will fall flat and not help but hurt a candidate. What is it they say about repeating mistakes and insanity???
Addendum: BTW, Drudge has a line up that says “Romney: I will boot many illegals in 90 days!” – but it links off to an article with no such claims that I can find. Can anyone confirm Romney made this statement?
I do not like his immigration position. That said, with the likelihood of a Democratic Senate in 2009, I think that it is not so much of an issue.
It is a disturbing situation vis-a-vis the GOP, but this is a free country, and freedom includes the right to screw up.
I have not heard him say that. I think it would have caught my attention if he had.
The following might have been what Drudge was referencing in his headline:
“He said illegal immigrants who arrived very recently would be deported immediately, but that he would support allowing a slower deportation process for those with families and deeper roots.”
“That would be negotiated,” he said. “For a lot of people it would be immediate. They have been here a short time, they are not paying their taxes, so [they should] just go right home.” He said this could be as quick as 90 days.”
smh10,
Sounds good to me. The ‘amnesty’ issues always revolves around long termers, not new comers. I agree here less than two years and you should leave.
A.J. I almost missed it too. There’s a page 2 that you have to click at bottom of page 1… and SMH10 missed the first part of the quote which is more devastating, if correct. According to this Romney wants no path to citizenship and wants to remove all illegals.
Quote from the Drudge link:
At every event, Romney pounds McCain for leading the congressional effort to provide illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship. Romney said he will force all illegal immigrants out of the country, but he refuses to detail precisely how and when.
He said illegal immigrants who arrived very recently would be deported immediately but that he would support allowing a slower deportation process for those with families and deeper roots.
“That would be negotiated,” he said. “For a lot of people, it would be immediate. They have been here a short time, they are not paying their taxes, so [they should] just go right home.” He said this could be as quick as 90 days.
This is what you get when you hire Bay Buchanan as a “Senior Advisor” to your campaign, which is exactly how she was introduced on FoxNews yesterday. She set some kind of record for the number of times a she-hack could use the word “amnesty” in under a minute. It was a pretty impressive feat actually.
I have to laugh when I hear Romiacs whining about the eeevil Ed Rollins on the Huckabee campaign. Bay Buchanan is Rollins in a skirt with brass knuckles and a switchblade. I was blown away that Mitt Romney made such a gross miscalculation by putting that woman out in front of the public as his emissary. Truly breathtaking and vomit inducing. I really thought he was smarter than that.
Did you read the item in AmSpec last week… that Romney apparently so valued the endorsement of Tom Tancredo (with his army of one percent) that he essentially paid for it by promising to underwrite the goof’s next run for public office? Yeah, I know… I was speechless too.
Yep, Romney went over. I knew it when I watched an interview several days ago as Tancredo explained why he threw his supporters to Romney. He said something along the line that he was very careful to get the assurances he needed. Yep.
At this point, I am admitting defeat. Typhoid Malkin and her posse (Ingraham & Lopez) won this battle. They will lose their war because as Harold pointed out…….even the Dims are not that stupid. Their base wants the same as Typhoid, but they did not hold the Congress that many years to let a block of voters get away.
I saw this at Breitbart:
Surging in New Hampshire, John McCain seemingly should be the candidate taking heat from his Republican presidential opponents. But Mitt Romney was the one assailed during a high-stakes GOP debate.
Romney’s rivals want to cripple his campaign with back-to-back losses in Iowa and New Hampshire that would hamper the wealthy former Massachusetts governor in states beyond.
Back and forth it went on Sunday, two days before the primary and only hours after Saturday night’s debate.
“My friend, you can spend your whole fortune on these attack ads, but it still won’t be true,†McCain told his chief competitor Saturday night, taking issue with Romney’s characterization of the Arizona senator’s immigration plan as amnesty.
“I don’t describe your plan as amnesty in my ad, I don’t call it amnesty,†Romney shot back—even though two of his TV commercials use the term, including on that says McCain “wrote the amnesty bill that America rejected.â€
On Sunday, Romney acknowledged: “I was incorrect.â€
************
The problem that Romney will have is that it is not legal to just haul people off, and it is not logistically possible. In other words, we have laws about due process and civil hearings for deportation, so far as I know they are not negotiated. I would assume that if they actually catch them entering there might be some way to send them back, but once they are here, the people have to be served, rounded up and the state can only hold them for so long and they have to get their hearings etc. Is Romney planning on ignoring all that?
I remember reading that back in the 30’s Hoover rounded up people and shipped them to Mexico to make room for the Okies. That was a social in the Great Depression. The problem was it turned out that over half those people were actually American citizens. I don’t think the government could get away with something like that today. No, the lawyers will be out in force, count on it.
Owl, I don’t understand your second paragraph. Please explain further. I’m pressing One for English for Dummies ; )
Terrye, I think Romney knows how impractical and offensive his threats are, and he probably doesn’t mean half the junk that’s falling out of his mouth. Which makes me despise him more for the fraud. I guess Bay-B is whispering in his ear promising millions of deport-o-votes. But how can such a smart guy think he can take that message into the general election.
By the way, I commend to all a brief and excellent piece by VDHanson, posted this morning at Mitt’s Corner. I think most people know VDH is very tough on immigration reform. He surprised me recently when he all but endorsed John McCain. He gave me a big nudge in the same direction.
[SNIP] So it seems that while “amnesty” is a political death sentence, so is mass deportation–the only element of the immigration debate that would play into the hands of the Democrats who otherwise lose big on the issue.
See:
The Deportation Albatross?
http://tinyurl.com/282j4w
Sally:
I think that was Romney’s mistake, he should have been himself. He was a good businessman and a successful Governor. But he listened to too many focus groups and tried to please them all.
Sally:
I followed that link. VDH is onto something. I think AJ should link to it.
Sorry Sally……my fault. It simply will not come out coherent.
I meant that the ‘send them all back’ crowd (lead by Malkin) has won the debate. As proof, I offer the 5 GOP candidates. Even Rudy has to keep his mouth shut. But they will not win their war to ‘send them all back’. They can’t because it is impossible. The only losers will be the GOP as a party and we are living it. The Dem base is probably more ‘deport them all’ than Malkin but this is where the DNC excels. They are very good at holding their voter block of minorities. I do not know a Mexican that would vote for a Pug today. It painted us ugly again.
Your link explains it. What makes me so mad is that it was all for nada. I have watched Malkin jab Bush and stir trouble for this party for YEARS. And you could trace it all back to this issue from the beginning. No one called her on it. Instead of sticking together to tout all the many accomplishments that have happened in the last 7 years (yes, under Bush) she and her crew attacked and it was always about her pet peeve issue. She played off the worst in us. She won.
What I will never understand is if this was such a big issue to these people, where were they for all the years it took for it to get this big? In 04 I don’t remember the blogs and pundits frothing at the mouth about it, or in 2000 either. It was as if they just went from disinterested or mildly annoyed to rabid in one fell swoop. And yes, it hurt the party.
Owl, I thank you for that superb and cogent clarification. My only disagreement is that McCain is mostly sticking with his original position. Yes it’s true, he’s found a rather mild and elegant way to appease the nuts by prefacing everything he says with: “I heard the American people last spring and I know they want the border secured first…”
McCain’s slap down of Romnesty Sat night was a tremendously satisfying sight to see. Romnesty lied flat out and never flinched, then repeated it the next day on another network. McCain’s immigration position, against the tide, is one of the reasons he’s risen to the top of my list.
Terrye, maybe you’ve hit on something. The blogs needed a reason to exist after slaying Dan Rather. Something big, important and dramatic with lots of sinister characters and sub-plots. Something with staying power, to fill in all those dull moments and long pauses. Something they could always rely on to whip up high emotion and blog hits. Especially Malkin, who has trouble doing anything besides smash mouth, ham handed, WWF style punditry. Maybe immigration was the ticket for life extension of what has turned out to be a very tedious and predictable racket — the blah blah blaaahhhgs.
And yes, I know this is a blog. You know who I’m referring to — the blaaahg hit squad that operates as yet another arm of the same old same old “conservative” echo chamber. A.J.’s blog is what the genre should, but never will, be.
Wow Sally,
That is quite a compliment!
Thanks, AJStrata
Candidate Research – Know Who You’re Voting For ( The Easy Way )
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/candidate_research_know_who_youre_voting_for/