Mel Martinez wants his party to come to its senses on immigration policy. Since Martinez is a former U.S. senator and a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, one would like to think his opinions would carry at least some weight, but whether he realizes it or not, it appears Martinez is being ignored.
This morning, the Floridian conceded his party "did the exact opposite of what we needed to be doing" for much of the last two years. Yesterday, however, Martinez told ThinkProgress he's optimistic Mitt Romney will be less extreme after the election.
For those who can't watch clips online, Scott Keyes asked the former senator whether Romney is likely to stick to his support for a self-deportation agenda. "I don't think so, no I really, really don't," Martinez replied.
This probably belongs in the "wishful thinking" category.
Martinez's argument is, in effect, that Romney is lying, but only to get elected. The presidential nominee doesn't actually believe the anti-immigrant stuff he's been saying, the argument goes, Romney's only pretending in the hopes that reactionary voters will be fooled into supporting him.
Remember, this is supposed to be a defense from a Romney supporter.
The truth, however, is readily available and impossible to ignore.
The newly-released Republican Party platform, which Team Romney helped write, endorses a self-deportation agenda. It also calls for "double-layered fencing" along the U.S.-Mexico border, and opposes any efforts to extend pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in the United States.
For his part, Romney has also vowed to veto the DREAM Act, sees Arizona's SB1070 as a national "model," and is palling around with Kris Kobach, among other things.
Martinez's argument boils down to: don't worry, Romney's only pretending, and once he's done deceiving American voters, he'll be far more reasonable. It's not exactly a persuasive pitch.
Leave a Comment:
Martinez is deluding himself that Romney is going to move to the center. He is afraid to alienate the hard right and I don't see that changing if Romney wins. Even more problematic is how Romney will be able to deal with Congress. Consider the possibilities that one or both houses could be Dem. Or if both houses are Republican, they will be dominated by the radicals.
And if both houses of Congress do wind up in the hands of Republicans, there wouldn't be a chance in hell that Romney would ever dare go against their wishes. And we will all be screwed, provided that: a) Republicans fail to neuter Senate filibuster rules, and b) Democrats obstruct like their lives depend on it. That will only degrade the reputation of Congress further, but it's better than the alternative, and it's not as if Congress' reputation is much higher than the floor in any case.
I recall that supposedly a certain German politician in the 1930s was supposed to be more "moderate" once he gained power.
@MeddlingMonk
The adage "Be careful what you wish for" applies if Romney wins. It would be wise for the Dems to let Republicans do some of what they want for two years and make a bigger mess of the country, our economy and the world's economy. When the economy tanks because of Republican policies Dems will be assured of returning to power in large numbers in the midterms. The mess will be so bad that Dems will have overwhelming numbers in the Senate and House with Romney virtually powerless over the budget and domestic policies. Republican domination of Congress will end with the radicals being chastised by the voters and the Republican party in disarray for the next decade.
careful what you wish for mr. paganucci. to allow the republans to get any part of what they want just to discredit them would be a serious mistake. there is no help for us if both the presidency and down-ticket races aren't won heavily democratic.
their business cronies would find ways to instantly improve the economy and unemployment. they would assume (rightly) that a short-term inconvenience like restarting factories and returning jobs (non-union, of course) to facilitate the "salvation" of the economy would be viewed as a republan success. they would then sweep the midterms. then use the supermajorities in both houses to pass anything they want. now the jobs really start to disappear.
then there is the supreme court. the republan members would all conveniently resign to be replaced by 25 year old political yes-men who we wouldn't be rid of for 50 years. then, even if we take back both houses and the presidency, they just declare anything they want to be unconstitutional.
no, it's too important that we work very hard now to prevent a republan win in november. hoping for a fix in the midterms is a bad strategy. it must be done now!
A lot of what you describe has already happened. The Bush administration created such a mess in Iraq and in the handling the aftermath of Katrina that Democrats won big in the 2006 midterms. The financial crisis in 2008, the result of Republican economic policies, saw the Democrats increase their hold on Congress and also take the White House. Did the GOP fall into disarray? You know the answer to that.
There's no particular reason to assume that the outcome will be any different the next time Republicans create a huge mess. And they won't be chastened. They'll lose an election or two, hand the mess off to the Democrats, blame Democrats for the mess Republicans created themselves, and come roaring back by virtue of the electorate's collective inability to remember recent events.
Frankly, Mike, I'm astonished that you could ever think it would be otherwise.
In the two previous fascist coups d'etat, that in Italy in 1922 and in Germany in 1933, the leader of the coup was the leader of the movement and in control of it. In this attempted fascist coup d'etat, the "leader" is a spineless fool who will do or say anything to get elected, and once in office will be under the control of the movement, not the leader. Anyone who thinks Romney will do anything other than what he is told do do - which is what he has done since he started running for President 6 years ago - probably believes the sun will rise in the west tomorrow as it circles the earth.
The promises of a liar are lies, period. If this was funny, I'd use GWB's fool me twice quote. To even consider someone who changes positions more than a man with hemorrhoids, is intentional blindness rather than wishful thinking. Those willing to sell out fellow Americans are beneath contempt. Mr. Martinez knows Mitt is lying either about one side or the other of this. It won't get better after the election unless Mitt loses.
"changes his position more than a man with hemorroids!"
OMG...I love it.
That a crazy ideologue like Martinez now sounds like a reasonable person ......
The inmates are fully in charge of the asylum.
Rock meet hard place , no turning back now.
Poor deluded Martinez, is this how you must be to be a rethugniCon? Mittens has moved to the right and frankly I don't see him moving back. And if Martinez thinks that Mittens is "lying now" in order to deceive the rabidly rightward base, he needs to wake up and stop deceiving himself.
Mitt will hold the pen, Norquist will tell him exactly what to sign.
He is deluding himself and his constituents. What a way to serve his community- pretending that the Republican platform is just an empty document.
So he knows Mitt will say anything to get elected but once in he will do as he pleases? So he thinks it is alright to deceive the voters? Well then he is in the right party anyway.
What kind of a politics is this? Vote for my guy because he's actually two-faced, and you're seeing the face you don't like, but I know he has another at the ready?
Martinez really doesn't think that Romney will support "self-deportation" immigration policy. Romney's sister is "sure" that he won't support the personhood amendment and the GOP abortion platform. Ann Romney could not tell us where Mitt stands. Some Republican voters seem convinced that Romney is a moderate who will govern from the center. The trouble is that Romney refuses to tell voters where he stands on anything, except that he opposes Obama. Mostly, he stands on both sides of every issue, trying to appease the base and attract swing voters. Americans will NEVER know where Romney stands because should he become president, he'll be obligated to stand where his wealthy donors to tell him to.
WHERE IS THE OBVIOUS FOLLOW UP QUESTION? "So is Mittens Von Horsington Romney III lying when he says he wants to veto the DREAM Act, put up more fences along the border, and calling SB10170 a model for the nation?"
The only lier is Obama wants to eliminate systematically the senior citizen with section 347 of the health reform IPAB an arbitrary board who is not accountable to no one .
the TRUIRJCA efective Dec 31 2012 the only lier as always is Mr.Barry (Obama)
Mitt Romney is an anchor baby. His father, George Romney, was born in Mexico. His family fled there because they did'nt like American laws. Did George Romney sneak across the border(should have built a taller electrified fence)? I have not seen George Romneys' citizenship papers. I vant to zee hiz papahs, mach schnell. Will Mitt self-deport?
If the re-publicans (pharisees?) are so sure of their beliefs and ideologies, why do they have to constantly lie, distort, and obfuscate in what they say to their own constituents and the general public? Could it be they actually know their theory of government is total hogwash, has never, and will never work?
I am an independent, and will vote for whom I believe will best serve the country. I put country first, then whatever political affiliation seems to best serve the needs of my community, my family, myself. I place high emphasis on integrity, and from what I see, the republican fundamentalist right wing bigots have little to offer in that department. If they lie to their own party members, what can we really expect once they are in power? Beware is all I have to say. Believing the shell shufflers is stupid, but placing your future in their hands is sheer lunacy!
As a member of the Mormon clergy, Mittens is a very poor choice for public office. His #1 allegiance is and will always be to his church. he has sworn an oath to that and has said as much in his past political life. The US and its people are far from his number one priority.
And Ryan is an extremist catholic, confused in addition, since he has said he learned the most from an atheist nut-case, Ayn Rand. Will Ryan take his orders from the Vatican or from the Coke Brothers? Either way, the country loses.