Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2007 General Board Posts >> Romney gets caught hiring illegals
        
(Message started by: Sean_C on Dec 5^th, 2007, 6:47pm)

Title: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Sean_C on Dec 5^th, 2007, 6:47pm

I never liked the man, I lived with the idiot for way to long. I was thrilled to hear this news, it just goes to show you the double standard exists.

Watch the video, he definately knew this long ago, it was always about the almighty buck he saved.

http://wbztv.com/local/Mitt.Romney.Belmont.2.602690.html

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by JeffB on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:30pm

You lived with him?

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Jonny on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:31pm

FAG!.....LMAO ;;D

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Gator on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:40pm

Quote:

But in a follow-up report, the Globe says a worker raking leaves at Romney's house the day after the debate told a reporter that he paid $7,000 to be smuggled into the U.S. from Arizona.

He was smuggled into the US from Arizona?

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Jonny on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:44pm

on 12/05/07 at 19:40:52, Gator wrote:

He was smuggled into the US from Arizona?

ROTFFLMMFAO!!!!! [smiley=laugh.gif]

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by DennisM1045 on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:54pm

In the interest of fairness to Romney...

He had previously warned the landscaping company that if they brought another illegal to his property he'd fire them. True to his word, he fired them yesterday after the Globe investigation. Romney's first mistake was not firing them the first time.

I'm paraphrasing Romney's response to questions from Giuliani on the topic: Is every man who hires a company to do work on his property responsible for checking the paperwork of every employee that shows up with a funny accent?

I don't think so.

Romney is a stuffed shirt. The school systems here in Massachusetts still haven't recovered from his fiscal policies. But I don't believe there is a Hypocritic bone in the man's body.

-Dennis-

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by JeffB on Dec 5^th, 2007, 7:57pm

I thought I saw him pull into wal mart and start flashing dollar bills..

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Jonny on Dec 5^th, 2007, 8:14pm

on 12/05/07 at 19:54:23, DennisM1045 wrote:

the Globe investigation.

Do you mean the same investigation that they racially profiled these landscape people at Romneys house?

Gee, for years the Globe has been complaning about Romney wanting the state police to check immigration status of EVERYONE they pull over.

Fucking hypocrits!!!!

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Linda_Howell on Dec 5^th, 2007, 8:19pm

Here's what I want to know:

Quote:

But in a follow-up report, the Globe says a worker raking leaves at Romney's house the day after the debate told a reporter that he paid $7,000 to be smuggled into the U.S. from Arizona.

I don't have 7000.00 where are these poor people getting THIS kind of money who are trying to get into the U.S.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Gator on Dec 5^th, 2007, 8:58pm

Linda, for some it's their life savings. For others it's money that someone already here is sending them. There are yet others, who's trip is paid for by their employers, who are expected to "work off the debt" in various sweat shops, wh0re houses, etc.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Linda_Howell on Dec 5^th, 2007, 9:06pm

Wow...Thanks Mike. I guess I had no idea of what really goes on. It seemed to me that 7 Grand goes a long way in Mexico. If they had that much money to pass out to some Coyote..it would seem they could feed and clothe and take care of their families THERE for a very long time.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by DennisM1045 on Dec 5^th, 2007, 9:19pm

on 12/05/07 at 20:58:38, Gator wrote:

You nailed it Mike! This is the dark underbelly of the human trafficing going on at our southern border. Where are the bleeding heart liberals on that issue - silent.

As much as much as we want to talk about the social and financial burden of these illegal visitors on our country, it's only a reality because they are a source of cheap labor that american companies can litterally work to death. After all, who is going to notice.

Anyone who knowingly employs illegals is complicit and should be held accountable. Unfortunately our laws aren't strong enough yet and neither is our will to enforce them. Dry up the jobs and the flow across the border will dry up too.

-Dennis-

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Charlie on Dec 5^th, 2007, 10:15pm

Good Mike.

I've said it before. Republicans don't know what to do because their friends want cheap labor; Democrats don't either. They like the votes.

Romney is going to give speech about his faith tomorrow, I think...whee. I recently saw JFK's speech about his Catholicism. What joy it would be to hear something like that today. I recommend it. I suppose it's on line somewhere?

Charlie

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by artonio7 on Dec 6^th, 2007, 3:43pm

on 12/05/07 at 21:19:46, DennisM1045 wrote:

At the rate the american dollar's value is plummeting ... it won't be too long before we'll all be going down to mexico for the good paying jobs.

sad....

with warm regards,
Tony

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by fubar on Dec 6^th, 2007, 4:05pm

I agree with you Charlie. There's a third part of the problem too, the American consumer. If we paid a fair wage to everybody, the cost of goods would skyrocket. Everybody (dems and repubs alike) loves a free ride, even when they know that the free ride costs real lives.

Who here would be willing to pay $10 for a head of lettuce? Don't laugh, it's possible.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by LeLimey on Dec 6^th, 2007, 4:06pm

Is this it Charlie?

Sen. John F. Kennedy confronted concerns about his religion head-on in the 1960 campaign that made him the first Roman Catholic to be U.S. president.

On Sept. 12, 1960, months after speaking out against anti-Catholic sentiment in the spring primaries, the Democratic presidential nominee gave a televised speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association directly addressing critics who worried that a Catholic president would be beholden to the pope.

Now, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is trying to ease the concerns of Christian conservatives about his Mormon faith, in a speech Thursday from George H.W. Bush's presidential library at College Station, Texas, 90 miles from JFK's venue.

In 1960, Kennedy thanked his Houston audience for the "generous invitation" to speak and followed with this address:

___

While the so-called religious issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here tonight, I want to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election; the spread of communist influence, until it now festers 90 miles off the coast of Florida — the humiliating treatment of our president and vice president by those who no longer respect our power — the hungry children I saw in West Virginia, the old people who cannot pay their doctor bills, the families forced to give up their farms — an America with too many slums, with too few schools, and too late to the moon and outer space.

These are the real issues which should decide this campaign. And they are not religious issues — for war and hunger and ignorance and despair know no religious barriers.

But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected president, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured — perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again — not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me — but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute — where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote — where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference — and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish — where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source — where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials — and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew — or a Quaker — or a Unitarian — or a Baptist. It was Virginia's harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson's statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim — but tomorrow it may be you — until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end — where all men and all churches are treated as equal — where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice — where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind — and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.

That is the kind of America in which I believe. And it represents the kind of presidency in which I believe — a great office that must neither be humbled by making it the instrument of any one religious group nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding its occupancy from the members of any one religious group. I believe in a president whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

I would not look with favor upon a president working to subvert the First Amendment's guarantees of religious liberty. Nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so — and neither do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test — even by indirection — for it. If they disagree with that safeguard they should be out openly working to repeal it.

I want a chief executive whose public acts are responsible to all groups and obligated to none — who can attend any ceremony, service or dinner his office may appropriately require of him — and whose fulfillment of his presidential oath is not limited or conditioned by any religious oath, ritual or obligation.

This is the kind of America I believe in — and this is the kind I fought for in the South Pacific, and the kind my brother died for in Europe. No one suggested then that we may have a "divided loyalty," that we did "not believe in liberty," or that we belonged to a disloyal group that threatened the "freedoms for which our forefathers died."

And in fact this is the kind of America for which our forefathers died — when they fled here to escape religious test oaths that denied office to members of less favored churches — when they fought for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom — and when they fought at the shrine I visited today, the Alamo. For side by side with Bowie and Crockett died McCafferty and Bailey and Carey — but no one knows whether they were Catholic or not. For there was no religious test at the Alamo.

I ask you tonight to follow in that tradition — to judge me on the basis of my record of 14 years in Congress — on my declared stands against an ambassador to the Vatican, against unconstitutional aid to parochial schools, and against any boycott of the public schools (which I have attended myself) — instead of judging me on the basis of these pamphlets and publications we all have seen that carefully select quotations out of context from the statements of Catholic church leaders, usually in other countries, frequently in other centuries, and always omitting, of course, the statement of the American bishops in 1948 which strongly endorsed church-state separation, and which more nearly reflects the views of almost every American Catholic.

I do not consider these other quotations binding upon my public acts — why should you? But let me say, with respect to other countries, that I am wholly opposed to the state being used by any religious group, Catholic or Protestant, to compel, prohibit, or persecute the free exercise of any other religion. And I hope that you and I condemn with equal fervor those nations which deny their presidency to Protestants and those which deny it to Catholics. And rather than cite the misdeeds of those who differ, I would cite the record of the Catholic church in such nations as Ireland and France — and the independence of such statesmen as Adenauer and de Gaulle.

But let me stress again that these are my views — for contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for president. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for president who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters — and the church does not speak for me.

Whatever issue may come before me as president — on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject — I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.

But if the time should ever come — and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible — when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.

But I do not intend to apologize for these views to my critics of either Catholic or Protestant faith — nor do I intend to disavow either my views or my church in order to win this election.

If I should lose on the real issues, I shall return to my seat in the Senate, satisfied that I had tried my best and was fairly judged. But if this election is decided on the basis that 40 million Americans lost their chance of being president on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser, in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics around the world, in the eyes of history, and in the eyes of our own people.

But if, on the other hand, I should win the election, then I shall devote every effort of mind and spirit to fulfilling the oath of the presidency — practically identical, I might add, to the oath I have taken for 14 years in the Congress. For without reservation, I can "solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution . . . so help me God."

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Jimi on Dec 6^th, 2007, 4:17pm

Gotta give it to JFK. He sure could make a speech. I miss him and I am a Republican.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by brewcrew on Dec 6^th, 2007, 4:31pm

on 12/06/07 at 16:17:09, Jimi wrote:

Gotta give it to JFK. He sure could make a speech. I miss him and I am a Republican.

You ain't alone there, pal.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Kevin_M on Dec 6^th, 2007, 5:22pm

Thank you Charlie, and Limey. :)

on 12/06/07 at 16:06:41, LeLimey wrote:

directly addressing critics who worried that a Catholic president would be beholden to the pope.

"... I do not speak for my church on public matters -- and the church does not speak for me.
...
And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.
..."

Among a lot of other good things he said, he convinced me of that.

Quote:

to the moon and outer space.

He also captivated America and the world with this visionary decision no one deterred him from, long after his death.

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by Charlie on Dec 6^th, 2007, 7:42pm

Thanks Helen. That's it.

God I miss serious people in politics.

Charlie --who feels old as I he saw it on the tube. He also remembers Elvis and the Beatles on Ed Sullivan. Yikes. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/TVsnack.gif

Title: Re: Romney gets caught hiring illegals
Post by BobG on Dec 6^th, 2007, 8:07pm

I like Romney as a businessman. He's made a lot of money for himself and others and saved some companies from going broke and thousands losing their jobs. It would be good if he could apply his business sense to government.
And, I don't give a rat's ass if he's Morman, Catholic, Baptist or other or none of the above. All long as it's not muslim.