Okay, the first part of the headline comes from The Liar Network (CNN), including Candy Crowley. Now CN, and the rest of the mainstream media, have beeen PUSHING Romney to "evolve" on illegtal immigratin. So when the people on CNN say that Mitt Romney is 'evolving on illegal immigration, just like Obama on gay mlarriage (and so many othher things), yu cant rely on CNN to be tellling the truth. Indeed, I ndeeed, this was one of Candy Crowley's LIES that I did not address int he article on Candy Crowley, liear. This is the CNN attempt to adopt the OBAMA LIE on illegal immigratin: tht the main illegal immigratin "issue' i this election is the "Dream Act", and Presidentt Obama's attempt to UNILATERALLY adopt the "Dream Act" --despite Obama saying a year ago that he had NO such authority. What th eLIARS at CNN are trying to do is folllow Obama's lead, andd make the issue of "illeal immigraitn" ALL abut the rather unimportant (except as a lying ply Obama shoud not get waywith) part of the illegal immigratin debate (if, thhat is, yu don't realize that Obama and leftist democrats fully intend for any "exceptiion" to immigratin laws to CNOSUME THE RULLE (the laws, such that really nly the exception is enforced). Still, it is simply a LIE that Romney's positoin on 'illegal imigratin" is "evvolving". Rather, the indicatins are the Romney's "position" on the Dream Act (whatever tghat is at any individual time) is "evolving". This is a very different thing ffrom the way cNN puts it. But there is a reason CNN is The Liar Networrk.
"Okay, Skip. You say that CNN is made up of liears, and it is proably so that they are pushing Romney further than Rmney either wants to go or has said he iis connsidering gong. So how can you be so vehement about Romney in the headline, when yu know thee people of CNN are liears."
First, let me clarify the headline, byond the turththat I don't think (for now) that Romney's entire position on illeagal immigratin (unsually statd to be "immigratin" on CNN, where "illegal immmiggratin is somewhat more offensive--under CNN policy--that the "N" word). is probably not YET chaniging much. That is a CNN LIE. But the last part of the headline, about Hell freezing over, is correct. But what is my position on OBAMA? As for Obama, I will not vote for Obama until BOTH Hell freezes over tAND the sun goes out (or explodes into a black hole, or whatever). Thus, yu can see that I believe Roney is "better" than Obama--jsut not enough better to justify voting for him. You don't see much distinctin? Well, enither do I and that is the roproblem Theoretically Romney is proabably considerably better than Obama, although not actualy "good". The problem is that, IN PRACTICE, Romney will probably be very little better, and perhaps wrse, while BURDENING "conservatives" with the consequences of his failure. Still, I admit it is possible I am wrong on this, because Obama is REALLY BAD. But at least the GOP has incentgive to fight against Obama. They have no such incentive as to Romney as President.
You now know where I am coming from. This brings us to illegal immigratin, and teh constant BETRAYALS of GOP establishment candidates like Romney and McCain. I simply cnnoat STAND teh betrayals. I could not live with myself if I voted for peole--during th e rest ofmy life--who I KNOW are going to betray me in fundamental ways. George W. Bush is teh LAST of those I will ever vote for.
What about Mitt Romney on illegal immigration? Well,, I suspect--if he can--that he will totally BETRAY me if he is elected, no matter what he does before the electin (where even Romney can't poossibly beelive he can get away with a real "reversal"). Jeb Bush,, who I thin of like I think of OBAMA (where both Hell and the sun would have to dramatically change before I would ever vote for him for nayting) said that he thught Romney had "boxed himself in on illegal immigratin"-implying both that the conservative positin on illegal immigratin is wrong AND that Romney would realy like to have another position if he had not had to LIE to win the GOP primaries. Now this says more about Jeb Bush, and the "Bushites", than it does about Romney, as we KNOW how bad George W Bush and Jeb Bush are on illegal immigratino. Still, there are more than enough signs that Romney WILL betray me on this, even if he does not do so before the leectin Indeed, Romney has ALREADY BETRAYED ME.
"Skip, yu jsut said Romney had not yet betrayed you, and you don't believe CNN when CNN tries to say that Romney is rethinking his entire positon on illlegal immmigraitn." All true, and irrelevant. The way Romney has BETRAYED me, and taken ten years off of my life (from frustatin) is the way he--and his "surrogatess"--are letting Obama and CNN CONTROL THE DEBATE. Romney and his surrogates should not even be talking aub the "Dream Act", as if it is immportant. Romney, and his poeople, should have INSTANTLY made this an issue of Obama vx. the AMERICAN PEOPLe. As this blog ha state, 75%--according to CNN---of the American people SUPPORT lthe Arizona law on illegal imigratin. Why does Romney want to be worrlying about iillegal immigrants and the 25%. Romney has been HANDED (by Obama) a WINNING issue, and is turning ti into a lOSING issue.
Obama againt DEMOCRACY, and the American people. That is how Romney needs to be appproaching this.: accusing Obama of being interested in nothing but lPOLITICAL GIMMICKS, even if he has to break the law (his OWN interpretatin of the law) to do it. Romney should be saying that he is OPEN to ideas on NARROW ways to make our immigraitn lwaws fairer--including a law giving a path to citizenship to people whoo honoralby serve a full term n the U. S. military, which Romney hsould say would already bee law except athat Obama wants to makke political poinnts rather than get passed what CAn+N be passed. Romney SHOULD be saying that teh MAIN problem now is to SToP illegal immmigratin, and the incentives for illegal immigants to think that they should come here (because they will be able to stay once they get here) So Rmney can say he is open to NARROW ways to make our immigraitn laws better, but will first focus his attention on the MAJOR problems of illegal immigration. Romney should continually SUPPORT tgehe Arizona law, and ntoe the way the AMERICAN PEOPLE supprot it. If President aObama paid as much attentin to SUPORTING ARIZONA, and evverctive Federal enforcement of immigratin laws, then we would be in a positoin to considert he NUANCES of "weaking" the law. All President Obama is interested in is getting around the immigratin llaws and NOT LISTENING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
no. I am orry. You cant tell me that Rmney is takng this "fight " to Obama and CNN. Rather, Romneyand his people are acting "defensive" for no apparent reason. Do you wonder that I beleive Rmney wil lBETRAY me on tis issue at the drop of a hat (or maybe without the dorop of a hat)? You should not wonder at it.
No, it is not ture that my entire focus is on illegal immigraitn, although it mroe than irks me to be on the WINNING SIDE of this important issue--while looking up and seeing the people supposedly on "my side" talking like I am a HICJK who does not understand the full issues here. I have previusly said that I--for now, although that was turrue of Rmney in 2008--would ssupport Marco Rubio for PRESIDENT, although NOT for re-electin to the Senate (when his seat comes up). This bog has previously noted the BETRAYLS of Marco Rubio of the Tea Party. That was BEFORE Rubio began pushing to BETRAY ME on illeagl immigratin. Still, as with Marco Rubioo, I would considder him ENOUGH better than Obama to vote for him against Obama. I won't have that choice. What that meaans is that Tomney had already FORGETED my vote before he became "ssquishy" on some aspects of illegal immigration (AFTER jumping on Rick Perry for Perry's own versoin of the "Dream Act"). No, I am not going thourgh al of the BETRAYALS of Mitt Rmney now . I have previously gone though some of them in this blog. The overall BETRAYAL is that Rmney takes on almost EVERY issue like he is trying to do with illeal immigraitn: AVOIDNG really pushing CONSERVATIVE ARGUMENTS in favor of CONSERVATIVE PLATITUDES. They are not nearly the samme thing. Roomney is NOT "fighting" for "conservatism". He is merely "fighting" to become President, without really "fighiting" for any "conservative" positin that is under any kind of attack. .
Nope. I can't stand it, no matter how bad Obama is. And I had no illusions about Obama the first time, which did not keep me forom NOT voting for McCain. Hell WILL freeze over before I ever vote for Mitt Romney for President.
P.S No proofreading, spell checking, editing or revisons of any kind (bad eyesight). Oh, I might occasionally catch an error as I am typing, or later see an error i will correct in a HEADLINE. Otherwise, whaqt you see is exactly the way I typed it the very first time--typos and all.