Our whole immigration policy does need to be changed, but you are absolutely right that we can’t even have a reasonable discussion about this now. I know people who are caught up in the visa mess. It really sucks for people who do want to become Americans as opposed to the squeaky wheels that are well oiled by La Raza sympathizers. I though the discussion last night about English as the national language was good. To me it is simply immoral to condemn children to second-class citizenship by pretending they don’t need to speak English. Maybe if we can use this type of argument to chip away at the multiculti nonsense, the needed discussions will follow.

Newt’s approach will be fine with me.

Lastly, we cannot forget the demographics if the GOP want to survive in the years to come.

If that blue state is California, you don’t win any of them.

…the only way to win, is lose. And move to another state.

…worked for me.

Thanks for the link. When you are in a blue state, you have to pick your battles cause you’ll never win them all.

I think you miss the point of self deportation. Romney is against amnesty because it raises the expectations of illegals that they just have to ride things out. He thinks that if there is a crackdown on hiring illegals, they won’t come here for jobs and may see brighter prospects back home. He sees that illegals are going home because of our bad economy. He also sees that going out and rounding up masses of people is unworkable. Do you have any idea how many sob stories would be broadcast daily in the US and abroad if that policy were attempted. We would immediately have a NIMBY type effect: not with my friend’s mother who is an upstanding member of our church.

The best approach is to tighten our border, offer disincentives to coming and staying here illegally, offering a fair deal to those who leave and want to return, and stating clearly why all immigrants should make sure their offspring have the language, civic, and social skills needed to function here. Naturally anyone who is caught breaking laws is deported.

I know you want a fight with Romney, but his positions are actually tougher than Newt’s.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/york-romney-struggles-massachusetts-problem/332026

“. . . I am saying this: Mitt Romney almost constantly perceives that he is boxed in.”

I agree with much of your analysis in your post, but I’m not sure it’s because Mitt sees himself as boxed in. I think he’s responding from his native left-of-center basis. I really do think his conservatisim is poorly worn.

I’ve made a similar point in other threads at this site by focusing on Newt; Newt is the only of the candidates who does not permit the left to define the question. Romney, Santorum, Paul all respond to a question even when it’s asked from a leftist the perspective. It’s an apologitic conservatism which is destined to keep conservatism as a minority position. It’s like saying “I’m sorry you feel that way, but . . . .” This approach validates the liberal basis of the question.

Only Newt among them takes the liberal premise of the query to task, sometimes correcting it, sometimes repudiating it. Critics read it as simply skewering “The Press” and say that this can’t play for long, but it’s much more than that. It’s an active repudiation of the liberal mindset from which point the question was asked. This was most clearly evident in Newt’s John King response calling the item “trash” (invalidating the question, the madness, if you will) and decrying the press’s constant attacks on Republicans to protect Obama (criticizing the method).

PS: Last but not the least, Romney is making his ITR public TODAY, just before the SOTUS speech…
What a great manager.

I like Santorum too…I liked him more than most people even in the early days of the campaign. I think his view about letting the large banks fail back in 2008 and 2009 is a bit too simplistic. They deserved to but that would have been catastrophic at that time.

Paul…..well…..

BTW, I just finished reading “13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown”. I recommend it highly to get an understanding of why we had that crisis and what is needed to make sure it doesn’t happen again. To give you a hint, Greenspan once said that if a bank is too big to fail, it’s too big.

The book has a slight liberal bias but I think most of us here can handle that.

Go to this link from here to get it and help Neo out with a small commish:

http://www.amazon.com/13-Bankers-Takeover-Financial-Meltdown/dp/0307379051