Mitt Romney, the Republican Party’s candidate for presidency in the United States, had a golden opportunity to explain to the Latino community how he would resolve the future of dreamers if he were to win the presidency. Sadly, he wasted that opportunity.
Last week, instead of acting with determination, courage and intelligence, Romney spoke at the NALEO Assembly (an organization that gathers the majority of Latino politicians elected and appointed to government positions) and he was unable to articulate a coherent policy about the dreamers or about the immigration issue in general. In contrast, a few days previous, President Obama had commanded the Department of Immigration to suspend the deportation and facilitate temporary work permits to the dreamers.
Romeny spoke vaguely and repeated the repertoire of platitudes about the subject, but he didn’t say anything remarkable. He affirmed, for example, that he would face the dreamers’ problems “in a civil and firm manner.” The quotation is textual and incomprehensible. What did he mean by that, that he would stipulate organized deportations?
In another part of the speech, he suggested that he would like that those who have performed military service or have their master’s degree in the United States to stay in the country. But he didn’t explain what he would do, specifically, so that these two types of immigrants could stay here. He also didn’t say what he would do with the immigrants that didn’t meet these requirements. Immigrants who have families here, graduated from college or high school, or have been working for years in this country and have never had a problem with authorities.
To date, Romney continues to suggest one or two ideas about the subject, but he doesn’t develop them. What’s worse, his attitude indicates an alarming lack of interest in resolving the complicated issue in a humane and viable way. It is true that recently the Republican candidate has avoided the aggressive rhetoric that has characterized him throughout his entire political career. For example, the aggressive rhetoric he used against his opponents in the Republican primaries of 2008 somehow showed minimal sympathy for the undocumented.
In the 2012 primary, Romney also spoke loudly and strongly against Governor of Texas Rick Perry for allowing some cases of undocumented youth to pay their state university tuition with a state resident rate and not the rate for students from abroad or residing in another state.
At NALEO Romney didn’t articulate policies, he made foolish remarks. For example, he told the audience the vicissitudes of returning to Mexico with his father, when he was only five years old. But he didn’t specify that his grandfather had fled to avoid punishment for breaking the U.S. laws against polygamy and found temporary refuge in that country. He also didn’t clarify why he shed light on the subject. Maybe one of the publicists advised him that when he was in front of people of Mexican origin he should mention his “almost Mexican roots”? So far, it was traditional for politicians who wanted the Hispanic vote to go to the neighborhoods with mariachi and tacos.
In any case, it is evident that Romney doesn’t understand that when a politician demonizes the undocumented community, he harasses a big part of the Latino community.
Obama hasn’t been exactly the ideal president for Latinos and his zeal for deporting people that came here to work and never committed a crime is inexcusable. But the reality is that there’s not much to choose from and the alternative that Romney offers looks a lot worse. Therefore, there’s no other option than to follow that one who remembered our children last minute, rather than risk electing someone who will surely do a lot worse.
Mitt Romney, el candidato del Partido Republicano a la presidencia de Estados Unidos, tuvo una oportunidad de oro para explicarle a la comunidad latina cómo resolvería el futuro de los dreamers si llegaba a ganar la presidencia, y la desperdició lastimosamente.
En vez de enfrentar con decisión, valor e inteligencia el reto que unos días antes le lanzó el presidente Obama al ordenar al Departamento de Inmigración suspender la deportación y posibilitarles un permiso temporal de trabajo a los dreamers, la semana pasada Romney habló en la asamblea de Naleo, una organización que agrupa a la mayoría de los políticos latinos electos y nombrados a puestos oficiales, pero fue incapaz de articular una política coherente sobre los dreamers o sobre el tema migratorio en general.
Habló vaguedades y repitió el repertorio de lugares comunes sobre el tema, pero no dijo nada sustantivo. Afirmó, por ejemplo, que él enfrentaría el problema de los dreamers "de una manera civil y firme". La cita es textual e incomprensible. ¿Qué quiso decir con esto? ¿Que dispondrá deportaciones muy ordenaditas?
En otra parte de su discurso, sugirió que a él le gustaría que quienes han hecho su servicio militar o su posgrado en Estados Unidos permanecieran en el país, pero no explicó qué haría él, en concreto, para que estos dos tipos de migrantes se quedaran acá. Tampoco dijo qué haría con todos los otros. Los que tienen familia acá; los que se graduaron de la universidad o de la secundaria; los que llevan años trabajando en este país y nunca han tenido problemas con la autoridad.
A la fecha, Romney sigue sugiriendo una o dos ideas sobre el tema, pero no las desarrolla. Peor aún, su actitud denota una alarmante falta de interés en resolver el complicado asunto en forma humana y viable. Es cierto que en esta ocasión el candidato republicano evitó el discurso agresivo que lo ha caracterizado durante toda su carrera política, por ejemplo, el que usó contra sus oponentes en la primaria republicana del 2008, que de alguna forma mostraron un mínimo de compasión por los indocumentados.
En la primaria del 2012, Romney también habló duro y fuerte contra el gobernador de Texas, Rick Perry, por haber permitido en unos cuantos casos que algunos muchachos indocumentados pagaran la cuota de su colegiatura en una universidad estatal con tarifa para residentes del estado y no con la de quienes vienen del extranjero o residen en otro estado.
Con Naleo, Romney no articuló políticas, dijo boberías. Por ejemplo, le contó a la audiencia las peripecias del regreso de México de su padre, cuando tenía apenas cinco años de edad, pero no especificó que el abuelo salió huyendo para evadir el castigo por infringir las leyes norteamericanas en contra de la poligamia y encontró refugio temporal en aquel país. Tampoco aclaró por qué sacaba a relucir el tema. ¿Será que alguno de sus publicistas le aconsejó que cuando se presente con gente de origen mexicano exhiba por un instante sus 'casi raíces mexicanas'? Hasta ahora, lo tradicional era que los políticos que quieren el voto hispano llegaran a los barrios con mariachi y repartiendo tacos.
Lo evidente, en todo caso, es que Romney no acaba de entender que cuando un político demoniza a la comunidad indocumentada hostiga a una gran parte de la comunidad latina.
Obama no ha sido ni por mucho el presidente ideal para los latinos y su celo por deportar a gente que vino a trabajar y nunca cometió un delito es inexcusable. Pero la realidad es que no hay más de dónde escoger y la alternativa que Romney ofrece pinta mucho peor. Por ello, no queda otra que seguir con el que a último momento se acordó de nuestros hijos, y no arriesgarnos a elegir a alguien que seguramente sería peor.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The madness lies in asserting something ... contrary to all evidence and intelligence. The method is doing it again and again, relentlessly, at full volume ... This is how Trump became president twice.
The economic liberalism that the world took for granted has given way to the White House’s attempt to gain sectarian control over institutions, as well as government intervention into private companies,
It wouldn’t have cost Trump anything to show a clear intent to deter in a strategically crucial moment; it wouldn’t even have undermined his efforts in Ukraine.