Illegals granted Social Security

Hot topic now (again) . . . and that's GOOD NEWS!!
McCain supporters and his media apologists are claiming that McCain didn't support SS for illegals.

The truth is on our side

Illegals granted Social Security
The Washington Times
By: Charles Hurt
May 19, 2006
The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security
benefits based on past illegal employment — even if the job was obtained
through forged or stolen documents.
"There was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted. That
sounds like amnesty to me," said Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican who
offered the amendment yesterday to strip out those provisions of the immigration
reform bill. "It just boggles the mind how people could be against this
amendment."
The Ensign amendment was defeated on a 50-49 vote.
"We all know that millions of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security and
Medicare taxes for years and sometimes decades while they work to contribute to
our economy," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.
"The Ensign amendment would undermine the work of these people by preventing
lawfully present immigrant workers from claiming Social Security benefits that
they earned before they were authorized to work in our community," he said. "If
this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard
for would be taken from them and their families."
**************

On The Issues has the info:
http://www.issues2000.org/2008/John_McCain_Immigration.htm
Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.
Voting YEA would table (kill) the proposed amendment to prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving Social Security benefits. Voting NAY supports that prohibition, while voting YEA supports immigrants participating in Social Security. Text of amendment:
To reduce document fraud, prevent identity theft, and preserve the integrity of the Social Security system, by ensuring that persons who receive an adjustment of status under this bill are not able to receive Social Security benefits as a result of unlawful activity.
* Proponents of the amendment say to vote NAY because:The Immigration Reform bill would allow people to qualify for social security based on work they did while they were illegally present in the US and illegally working in the US. People who broke the law to come here and broke the law to work here can benefit from their conduct to collect social security.
* In some cases, illegal immigrants may have stolen an American citizen's identity. They may have stolen an American's social security number to fraudulently work. This amendment corrects this problem.
* Opponents of the amendment say to vote YEA because: Americans understand that for years there are undocumented workers who have tried to follow our laws and be good neighbors and good citizens, and have paid into the Social Security Trust Fund.
* Once that person regularizes his or her status, and as they proceed down the path to earned citizenship, they should have the benefit after having followed the law and made those contributions. That is fairness.
* We should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts. That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial contributions.
* The amendment proposes to change existing law to prohibit an individual from gaining the benefit of any contributions made while the individual was in an undocumented status. I oppose this amendment and believe it is wrong.
Reference: Preclusion of Social Security Credits; Bill S.Amdt.3985 to S.2611 ; vote number 2006-130 on May 18, 2006
Actually, under McCain's bill once Illegals gained citizenship they would be credited/payed back all of their social-security withholdings that they had accrued WHILE WORKING AND LIVING HERE ILLEGALLY.
That was a very disturbing part of the bill that McCain authored.
McCain DID support social security benefits for current illegals and that is what the ad claimed. I know that facts hurt, but McCain can only blame himself. Apparently McCain doesn't now support such benefits. That's the right side of the issue and I'm glad he's come over to it. But this has hardly been an area where we're getting any straight talk from Mr. McCain.

"Romney Spoke In Glowing Terms That Evoked The Sunny Optimism Of Former President Reagan"

Friday, December 28, 2007

"Romney Spoke In Glowing Terms That Evoked The Sunny Optimism Of Former President Reagan"

Posted by: Hugh Hewitt  at 10:08 AM

From the AP's Glen Johnson, on Mitt Romney's campaigning in New Hampshire yesterday, before leaving for Iowa through the end of the caucuses:

 

Romney spoke in glowing terms that evoked the sunny optimism of former President Reagan, to whom Romney referred several times. At the end of the day, Romney departed for Iowa, where he will remain through its Jan. 3 caucuses. After that, he will campaign around-the-clock in New Hampshire before its Jan. 8 primary.

"No one votes for yesterday; they vote for tomorrow," Romney said at one point. "Elections are about the future, the future of our families, the future of our country."

It is a rare thing to get an AP reporter to bless any campaign moment with a comparison to Ronald Reagan's sunny optimism.  Romney's not the only candidate on the trail that brings enthusiasm and energy to the race day in and day out, but Senator Obama is on the other team, and Rudy is struggling because the mayor relied on a strategy that keeps him on the bench until Florida.  GOP voters in Iowa and New Hampshire who care about winning in November should keep in mind that Reagan won massive victories in November 1980 and 1984 because he encouraged the country to believe it could beat the Soviet Union, could spread prosperity, and could defend freedoms at home while exporting them abroad and he did so with a smile and a joke backed by incredibly delivered rhetoric.  It is about the right vision married to the right skills set.

Republican presidential hopeful, former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney, left, shares a light moment with his wife Ann, right, as she addresses a crowd during a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H., Thursday, Dec. 27, 2007. Romney answered questions concerning Pakistan during the stop. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

Romney's new ad, "Future," keeps the focus on the election and the years ahead while reminding voters of Senator McCain's opposition to the Bush tax cuts and the McCain-Kennedy immigration "reform" attempted jam down.  ( More on Senator McCain's record of putting his finger in republican eyes here .)

Mike Huckabee is in deep trouble, and not just for gaffe upon gaffe. The new revelations about accepting money from stem-cell research groups may disturb even his most dedicated evangelical supporters.  From Politico.com:

Mike Huckabee last year accepted $52,000 in speaking fees from a bio-tech giant that wants to research human embryonic stem cells, a non-profit working to expand access to the morning after pill and a group pushing to study whether tightening gun control laws will reduce violence.

The deflation of the Huckabee campaign frees up voters to go to either Romney, Thompson or McCain though any evangelical leaving Huckabee is unlikely to look past Senator McCain's opposition to a federal Marriage Amendment or the Gang of 14.  Romney and Thompson are both pushing conservative agendas, but the momentum is with the former governor as the home stretch opens in Iowa. 

UPDATE: Another Huckabee gaffe!  The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder reports that the former Arkansas governor puts Afghanistan on Pakistan's eastern border in comments defending his foreign policy credentials.

This sort of a misstep isn't serious in the summer or even the fall, but coming six days before voting after yesterday's gaffe and in the course of remarks meant to rebut criticism of your grasp of foreign policy, a geography gaffe causes a collective shudder among undecideds even as Huckabee's base absorbs the news about his speaking fees from stem cell research advocates.

Even if Huck hangs on in Iowa, it will be tough to take his Huckmentum west to New Hampshire, south to Michigan and north to South Carolina.

Mark Steyn On Pakistan And The Presidential Race

HH: You know, I have been making the argument, and into some pretty heavy wind today, that this also undermines Fred Thompson and John McCain, because Senators don't run anything, Mark Steyn, except their mouths and committees badly, that it's not about visiting a country, it's about managing a war, and that Giuliani and Romney have executive experience, and Hillary can actually be understood to have some executive experience, or at least being close to it for a while. What do you make of the idea that foreign crisis elevates John McCain's rather sad record of legislative screw-ups because he's traveled the globe? 

MS: Well, I would generally agree with you that Senators make bad, not just bad presidents, actually, but bad everything. I mean, John Kerry couldn't even run that donut stand in Boston, which is his only experience in the private sector, as far as one knows. You know, they are the classic examples of kind of rolodex politics, that they think it's about flying across the world and meeting other A-list names. And I think that is exactly what is not needed at this time. As you say, I think an executive ability, combined, I think, with a grasp of the underlying demographic reality, you know, Pakistan is a young country, it has one of the highest birth rates in the world, and although we can talk about this and that, and I've been talking, you know, it's only 60 years old, this country. But in a sense, to all those young men, 18, 19, 20, that it exports all over the planet, what Pakistan was like in 1947 is utterly foreign and utterly irrelevant to them. And so the sort of, these kind of people who think it's just about getting on the phone and speaking to some other A-list name in the rolodex on the other side of the world, I think that's about the least helpful way to approach this thing.  

 

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=8cb3ba5e-403c-4578-8dc5-03bc8a848733

Twas the night before Christmas...

... and all through the house, not a child was crying, you could have
heard a mouse! With holiday cheer and a future New Year, brings on
needed change that is well in high gear. With Rudolph losing ground
while eyeing his past to McCain resurrecting his straight talk
express. With the new things each day and surprise by Huckabee,
awakened a term, like clemency. Now with days that evolve and come
unto us, spawns new words like "HuClemency theocraticus". With new
names that come like Ron, Tom and Fred, from off the wall lexis to
those that act dead. Now with Romney on track and leading the way,
receiving more votes day by day. So with Romney and Rudy to Mike and
McCain, Dash away Dash away- one way train. So off to the races, and
out the gate, "Who will be America's Pick in 2008?

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year and may the next year be as
exciting and challenging as this last year, but in regards to Mitt; it
will be a fun and enjoyable ride

Mcdav
Montanans For Mitt
www.montanansformitt.com
Jon McNiven-Founder

From Wolf

Although not the heavyweight that Judge Bork is, Joe Arpaio, America's toughest Sheriff, Maricopa County AZ, is reported in Iowa on Mitt's behalf. Arpaio is a real character and as conservative as any sheriff in the country. He's the sheriff of 'Tent City' and the same guy who makes prisoners wear pink jump suits! Bork and Arpaio, not a bad 1-2 punch for the last few days.

From Steve

I love how they call these negative adds, how are you going to differentiate the candidates without these adds, I guess the media wants us to pick the candidate with the best Christmas Commercial.

Ann Curry Dismisses Reagan's Foreign Policy Credentials

Ann Curry Dismisses Reagan's Foreign Policy Credentials

By Justin McCarthy | December 28, 2007 - 12:36 ET

NBC's Ann Curry interviewed Mitt Romney on Friday morning's Today on the impact of Benazir Bhutto's assassination, and in a tough interview, she dismissed Ronald Reagan's foreign policy credentials. When Curry questioned Romney's foreign policy experience, Romney noted that Reagan "was a governor, not a so-called foreign policy expert." Curry dismissively stated "Reagan was not elected at a time of war."

No, Reagan was just elected in an intense point in the Cold War. The Soviets had invaded Afghanistan and U.S. diplomats were still being held hostage in Iran. Romney did say that Reagan was "elected at a time of the Cold War. And the Cold War was the greatest challenge that was faced by this nation in the last half of the last century."

Curry, who pushed Chris Dodd to slam the Bush administration on alleged "torture" and Al Gore to run for president, offered Romney tough (if not unfair) questions, and continually interrupted Romney throughout the interview. The entire transcript is below.

ANN CURRY: Reaction to Bhutto's assassination was swift from the candidates running for president. So will her death prompt voters to reconsider who is qualified to lead this country especially when it comes to foreign policy? Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is running for the Republican nomination. Governor Romney, good morning.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Good morning Ann.

CURRY: Governor, if you were president today and you could get President Pervez Musharraf on the phone, what would be your message to him this morning?

ROMNEY: Well, the message is to rebuild the kind of strength that he's previously had with the people and to move towards democracy. I think it is important for a reconciliation, particularly with Mr. Sharif and potentially with the remaining leadership in Madam Bhutto's party to try and reach a consensus, to move towards elections and to legitimize in the eyes of the people of Pakistan the government and be able to move forward with the kind of stability --

CURRY: You've heard the criticism- excuse me for interrupting. You've heard the criticism that in fact he was an impediment according to Benazir Bhutto to democracy and also the criticism he may not have done enough to help prevent, to protect her and prevent what happened yesterday. Are you at all concerned in making this phone call to him about the quality of his character?

ROMNEY: Well, I'm not concerned about the quality of his character but I am concerned about the quality of his judgment in a setting like this. I think his action for instance to declare martial law in the past was one that was destabilizing and weakened his position there. I think his resistance to having Madam Bhutto become part of the government over time was a mistake in his part. I think he misread the mood of the Pakistani people and he should have moved more aggressively towards democratization. But this is not your average Muslim nation. This is a nation which has had democracy and he should have moved more quickly to restore democracy.

 

CURRY: Well, given that, has the United States made a major mistake in having President Musharraf be a major ally in the War on Terror? Is he a good ally in this War on Terror and does his country still deserve this $10 billion in U.S. aid in your view? Would you continue it as president?

ROMNEY: Well, we of course take action to protect our interests. And the reason we send money to Pakistan is to protect our interests and try to root out terrorists in the northwest portion, particularly of Pakistan, so that they can't continue to make incursions into Afghanistan and of course spread terror throughout the region--

 

CURRY: So that's a yes, you would continue that aid?

ROMNEY: Oh yes, we continue that aid and we're going to continue to work with General Musharraf, but try and move him to a posture that actually has more potential for being a long --

CURRY: So if you try to move -- sorry to keep interrupting but we don't have a lot of time. So if you were to try and move him, what grade would you give him today, "A" to"F," in terms of where he is where you would want him to be as an ally on the War in Terror?

ROMNEY: I'd want him to project strength to show that we also have the, that he has the support of the United States behind him, that we're standing alongside him and that we're moving towards democracy, that he's meeting with the leadership in both parties, multiple parties, that he's willing to open up this process to fair and open elections and that he'll respond to the voice of the people and bring stability back to the country and democracy.

CURRY: Most analysts would say, governor, that the events of yesterday will help your chief opponents Rudy Giuliani and John McCain. Are you concerned, are you worried that your impact, that your campaign will be impacted negatively?

ROMNEY: Oh, I think we have to put the events of the world at a higher level than thinking about local politics. But I do believe as well that people recognize that what we want in a leader is a person who can actually guide America in a very challenging time. You look back to the -- one of the great foreign policy leaders of our nation was Ronald Reagan. He was a governor, not a so-called foreign policy expert. He was a person who knew how to make difficult decisions and how to lead in times of crisis. And I think if you look at my life's experience you'll recognize that's what I bring to the table.

CURRY: Ronald Reagan was not elected at a time of war. Why should voters embrace you without having -- they're not seeing you have had a lot of foreign policy credentials. Why should they embrace you as leading this nation in this very challenging time in our world's history?

ROMNEY: Well, certainly Ronald Reagan was elected at a time of the Cold War. And the Cold War was the greatest challenge that was faced by this nation in the last half of the last century. So it was a very critical time. Ronald Reagan took on the spread of Soviet style communism throughout the world and he was successful not because he was a general himself and thought he could mastermind our military strategy but instead because he had the skills of leadership that allowed him to bring together brilliant people, to chart a course that would overcome Soviet expansionism and it worked. And my life's experience is likewise, being a strategist in the private sector, in the Olympics and also in running a state. That kind of leadership skill I think is exactly what America needs right now.

—Justin McCarthy is a news analyst at Media Research Center.