PDA

View Full Version : Dreamers and Mitt the Merciless



okie52
1/31/2012, 12:31 PM
Mitt the Merciless. He must be kicking someone's azz.



The DREAM Act: Why would Mitt Romney veto it?
Sunday, January 29, 2012 - Ad Lib by Catherine Poe

EASTON, Md., January 29, 2012 — Mitt Romney, supposedly the Republican candidate with the softest heart, stares sternly into the TV cameras, unflinching, gripping the podium, and says callously that as president he would veto the DREAM Act if it came across his desk, defining it as basically “a handout.”

Wrong again, Governor. The DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) is a pathway for children brought here by their parents who came to America as undocumented immigrants. Since they themselves did not slip across any border illegally or overstay a visa, the DREAM Act would allow those young immigrants to work towards citizenship by:
■graduating from high school;
■then graduating from a two year college;
■or working towards a degree in a four year college;
■or serving in our military;
■as well as being a productive member of society with no criminal record;
■then after six years, applying for permanent resident status.
■and after that, applying for citizenship.

Certainly not a handout.

Back in July, I wrote two columns on the DREAM Act, debunking the myths and misinformation out there about this humanitarian bill that the Republicans in Congress have prevented from getting to President Obama’s desk. Too bad Mitt never found the time to read one of them. But then he has been too busy pandering to what is euphemistically called “the low information voters.” Translation: “One who votes based on information gleaned from other low information voters, rumors, viral emails, and FOX News.” Urban Dictionary

And then came Florida.

This is a state “where 13 percent of registered voters are Hispanic, where the nation's largest Spanish-language TV networks are based and where the nation's third-largest number of illegal immigrants live,” according to ABC News.

Now Romney’s words have come back to haunt him, as young Latinos speak up, challenging his way or no way on the DREAM Act. Obviously they are having an effect. During last Thursday’s debate, Romney “softened” his rhetoric. Not only is he not for deporting “11 million grandmothers,” as he lambasted Newt Gingrich, he has decided that the DREAM Act could perhaps have an exception that he as President Romney could live with: a young person signing up for one of the military services.

So he has no trouble exempting an undocumented young person as long as he or she is willing to risk getting wounded, maimed, or killed while fighting for a country that views children brought here illegally as not worthy of citizenship.

The young person who wants to go to college and follow the stringent rules to citizenship? Sorry, you’re out of luck even though you want to become a productive, tax paying citizen, who gives back to your adopted country. Your sacrifice is not great enough. And this from a man who did not serve in the military because of his draft deferment as a Mormon minister of religion (missionary) for two and half years in France and then received another three year deferment for his academic studies. Doesn’t quite seem fair, does it?

Even with Mitt mitigating his position on the DREAM Act, Republican leaders are still worried about the future of his campaign as he heads West into states with large Hispanic populations. His veto promise has Republicans has Republicans up at night, fretting that his anti-DREAM Act stance will alienate the growing number of Latino voters in Western swing states who appear to now be on the fence even after supporting Obama in 2008. So Romney’s ploy to ingratiate himself with hard line Republican primary voters such as those in South Carolina at the expense of Hispanics may backfire this fall, especially since the Pew Research Center found that 91% of the country’s Hispanics support the DREAM Act.

Already there is a backlash in Florida. The DREAM Act activists are a strong presence there, demanding that their Republican elected officials challenge the harsh words of the four candidates. Even Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio has felt the heat, which is probably one of the reasons he stepped forward and ask Newt Gingrich to take down his misleading ad against Romney.

Latino Politics reports that Rubio, a Cuban-American, said this past Friday at the Hispanic Leadership Network conference in Miami, "For those of us who come from the conservative movement, we must admit that there are those among us who have used rhetoric that is harsh and intolerable, inexcusable. We must admit, myself included, that sometimes we've been too slow in condemning that rhetoric."

But will such temperate words mollify the Hispanic voters who find that all four candidates are tougher than President Obama on illegal immigration? And can Mitt Romney regain his balance without flip-flopping once again. Allowing for the exception for military service is a flip. Now will he flop and completely reverse his position?

Hispanic voters make up 9% of all voters in the U.S., which may not seem significant, but their concentration in key states such as New Mexico, Colorado, or Nevada can make or break a squeaker of a race. Right now there are 24 states where Hispanics have the capacity to influence electoral outcomes, especially in tight races at every level.

Republicans remember only too well that in 2008, 67 percent of Latinos voted for President Obama, and in the 2010 midterm elections 60% of them cast ballots for Democratic members of Congress, according to national exit polls.

This is why Mitt Romney’s stance against the DREAM Act, threatening to wield the mighty veto pen, is making Republican leaders nervous. If Romney continues down this path, he will soon be known as Mitt the Merciless.

contact Catherine Poe, see above. Her work appears in Ad Lib in the Communities at the Washington Times. She can also be heard on the Democrats for America's Future. She is also a contributor to broadcast, print and online media.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ad-lib/2012/jan/29/dream-act-why-would-mitt-romney-veto-it/

badger
1/31/2012, 01:30 PM
Florida tends to bring out the "Free Cuba," "reform for fair immigration" and "I love hard working Hispanics" stuff in the presidential primaries.

And then, they go back to illegal immigrant bashing immediately after.

okie52
1/31/2012, 03:59 PM
Can a dem even say"illegal immigrant" or does it always have to be "undocumented worker"?

badger
1/31/2012, 04:12 PM
Can a dem even say"illegal immigrant" or does it always have to be "undocumented worker"?

Or migrant. :)

True story: In Oregon, they do not have handicapped parking spots. They are "alterly abled" parking spots :D

okie52
1/31/2012, 04:19 PM
Or migrant. :)

True story: In Oregon, they do not have handicapped parking spots. They are "alterly abled" parking spots :D

Yes, SanJoaquin teaches a class for "migrant workers" that is in California.

Alterly able....hahahaha.

We probably need to revisit the PC terminology and update it.

Too bad ICT is gone as I'm sure he had the handbook.

StoopTroup
1/31/2012, 07:54 PM
Yeah the Hispanic Vote seems to be really killing Mitt right now, LMAO

Also, if Rubio thinks he runs things down there, he must have Scarfaces Grandson getting him his weight in Pure Cocaine and be constantly high.

Rubio just found out his days are numbered IMO

SanJoaquinSooner
1/31/2012, 11:31 PM
Yes, SanJoaquin teaches a class for "migrant workers" that is in California.

Alterly able....hahahaha.

We probably need to revisit the PC terminology and update it.

Too bad ICT is gone as I'm sure he had the handbook.


Migrant Workers PC? I don't think so. Actually the classes are for their kids. If the parents do seasonal work in agriculture, fishing, or food processing and cross school district lines moving from one place to another to accept employment they fall under the accepted definition. It has nothing to do with the issue of legal presence. I don't work for border patrol or ICE or Stasi, so I have no reason to check.

SanJoaquinSooner
2/1/2012, 12:00 AM
Both Mitt and Newt say they'd support a Dream Act for military service, but not for college.

I'm guessing they reason that an acceptable percentage of military vet Dreamers will gravitate toward the GOP by the time they become citizens.

It's like the policies for Cubans. When they're in a boat a 100 yards from shore they're illegal but the second they hit shore, amnesiaty sets in. The pubs are waiting on the beach with a reception party, a green card, and honorary membership to the Grand Old Party.

okie52
2/1/2012, 12:09 AM
I just can't seem to find Common ground with these "people".

I want to normalize relations with Cuba and kill the dream act.

bigfatjerk
2/1/2012, 12:22 AM
We can't pass anything like a Dream Act or anything to help the 10 million+ illegals that are already here till we do a two major things that neither party wants to do anything about.

-We have to either basically end the war on the drugs. Or send troops in mass on the border to end the violence on the border. Right now that's more of a threat to our national security than the borders of Pakistan or Iran or Lybia or Syria or France or Korea or Germany or Japan or whatever other countries we have our troops in over seas.

-We have to completely reform entitlements to where they are solvent and able to handle 10-15 million more people or more. Right now the can't handle the current population with entitlement spending and about 10-15 years entitlements will be so big that they will completely take over the budget. If you think we can legalize any immigrant population with our entitlement spending going the way it is you are crazy. We can't afford the 200 or so million people that are getting entitlements right now.

We actually have a large area to where we can almost double our population in the western USA if we really wanted to so to me adding immigration isn't a bad idea. But under our system it will never work because we are already spending way too much money overseas and on our entitlements, as well as on trying to bail out rich people that both parties like.