Alan Keyes
June 28, 2012
Update re Romney's refusal to renounce Obama's abusive executive order
By Alan Keyes

Under the headline "Romney vows to overturn Obama immigration plan," the Washington Examiner reported on Romney's speech to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Conference.

Mitt Romney, in a long-awaited immigration address on Thursday, vowed to overturn President Obama's directive to stop the deportation of young illegal immigrants, saying he would replace that "stopgap" measure with comprehensive, long-term immigration reforms.

Romney, speaking to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Conference in Orlando, charged that Obama's policy shift was politically motivated and that he had put many other priorities ahead of immigration reform before being "seized by an overwhelming need to do what he could have done on day one."

"I will put in place my own long-term solution that will replace and supersede the president's temporary measure," Romney said.

For several reasons, this statement illustrates the pattern of crypto-socialist deception that has characterized Romney's faux Republican/Conservative campaign:
  1. He implies criticism of the change Obama made in immigration law enforcement, but he doesn't actually say it was wrong. He criticizes the timing, with words intended to lead his Latino audience to believe that he (Romney) would have made the change "on day one." So he differentiates himself from Obama by asserting that he would do what Obama has done, only more efficiently.

  2. By saying that Obama could have implemented the policy "on day one," he tacitly dismisses the fact that someone who respects the Constitution's assignment of legislative initiative to Congress could not in good faith (i.e., consistent with his oath to uphold the Constitution) have issued what he calls a "directive" at all. Romney speaks as someone who's at ease with the notion that the President can, at will, alter the laws without bothering to seek legislation from Congress. In this respect, he is just as much of a threat to constitutional self-government as Obama.

  3. Romney says "I will put in place my own long-term solution." With this language, he confirms that he has the same dictatorial mindset as Obama. Someone who takes seriously the oath to uphold the Constitution would never use the dictatorial "I," unless it be in a sentence that says "I will work with Congress to put in place...etc."

  4. Someone faithful in his allegiance to the Constitution would have criticized and renounced Obama's unconstitutional usurpation of Congress's legislative prerogative. He would have done so at the outset of his remarks. Romney never does so at all.

  5. What's most striking here is the deceptive stance — a critical tone that avoids all criticism of the substance, from an immigration or constitutional perspective. That's because in substance, Romney does not differ that much from Obama. He is quietly selling himself as the candidate who will get done the job Obama is trying to do, with greater speed and efficiency.
What sense does it make to pretend that the "lesser evil" is a more competent and efficient purveyor of socialism and destroyer of America's geographic, demographic, and constitutional sovereignty? The folks who think it makes sense are basically saying, "Since we're being raped in any case, we prefer being raped by Romney. He's promised to be gentle (even though he wasn't so gentle as Governor of Massachusetts)."

The GOP may lose the election if Obama finds a way to ask the question "Since Romney and I are going in the same direction, why don't you people admit your real reason for hating me; could it be racismmmmm?" Romney will answer: "Not at all. I'll just get where we're going without terrorizing and bankrupting the country."

At which point, anyone who really cares about America will stop fooling themselves about the outcome of the election. It's unconstitutional socialist tyranny, either way. Is there no one who cares enough right now to do something before we pass that point of no return?

To see more articles by Dr. Keyes, visit his blog at LoyalToLiberty.com and his commentary at WND.com and BarbWire.com.

© Alan Keyes

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Alan Keyes

Dr. Keyes holds the distinction of being the only person ever to run against Barack Obama in a truly contested election – one featuring authentic moral conservatism vs. progressive liberalism – when they challenged each other for the open U.S. Senate seat from Illinois in 2004... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Alan Keyes: Click here

More by this author