What’s wrong with Coulter’s case for Romney
Alexis Zarkov writes:
Most of Coulter’s essay tries to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear by trying to convince the reader that Romney is really a conservative. The very Romney who said,
I believe the world is getting warmer and I believe humans have contributed to that. It’s important for us for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors…. I love solar and (wind) power, but they don’t drive cars. And we’re not all going to drive Chevy Volts.
Amazingly, Coulter tells us that Romney wants to staple green cards to graduating foreign students. Does she think this is a conservative, pro-American position? Graduates in science and engineering have faced stagnant salaries for a very long time—there is no shortage, but Romney ignores that in his zeal to hold down American salaries.
Coulter would also have us believe that Romney is not the Republican establishment candidate. As pointed out in View from the Right only yesterday, Romney’s top donor is Paul Singer. That Paul Singer who was a major contributor to the Bush campaign. How much more Republican establishment can one get? Of course none of this makes a case for Gingrich. With Romney and Gingrich conservatives are stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea.
LA replies:
Here is what Coulter wrote:
Romney is now the only remaining candidate for president who opposes amnesty for illegals. (Ever since President Bush’s amnesty plan cratered on the shoals of public opposition, no Republican will ever use the word “amnesty,” despite wanting to keep illegals here—just as Democrats refuse to say “abortion,” while supporting every manner of destroying human life.)
Romney supports E-Verify and a fence on the border. As governor he promoted English immersion programs for immigrants, signed an agreement with the federal government allowing state troopers to enforce federal immigration laws, and opposed efforts to give illegal immigrants in-state tuition or driver’s licenses.
At the same time, Romney says he’d like to staple a green card to the diploma of every immigrant here on a student visa who gets a higher degree in math or science.
She doesn’t say anything, one way or the other, about Romney’s green-card-for-science-degree proposal, but by prefacing it with “At the same time,” she is implicitly acknowledging that the proposal undercuts her general approval of Romney for supporting immigration law enforcement.
It strikes me as a terrible—and terribly naïve—idea. With this kind of incentive, fly-by-night masters in science programs will be opening all over the place, mediocre students from various Third-World countries will apply and get admitted to them, then they get a student visa, spend one or two years in the U.S. “earning” a master’s degree, and they’re home free, awarded permanent legal residency in the U.S.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 30, 2012 11:33 AM | Send