In the 19th century, the Romneys fled the law

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/09/09/romneys

In an attempt to blunt the surging presidential candidacy of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Mitt Romney recently embraced two hot-button immigration issues in an appeal to Tea Party followers: He called for an end to so-called sanctuary cities harboring undocumented aliens, and he insisted that the next president "must do a better job of securing its borders, and as president, I will."

Yet, Romney's hard-line rhetoric overshadows a family secret: Few have benefited more from porous borders and "sanctuary" cities on either side of the border than the Romney family.

Last week, in fact, both Perry and Romney paid well-tweeted visits to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for advice on the immigration issue. In the 19th century, Arpaio would have been taking a close look at the Romney's familial flouting of Arizona law.

Romney's ancestral legacy of polygamy, of course, is hardly news. The Washington Post did a feature story last month on Romney's sizable family community in northern Mexico, and the role of his great-grandfather Miles Park Romney, "who came to the Chihuahua desert in 1885 seeking refuge from U.S. anti-polygamy laws."

More at the link --

[Boojatta]

1. If Alan Keyes hears about this, then he might call for repeal of anti-polygamy laws.

[JustAnotherGen]

2. So did my family

My great great grandfather was a runaway slave from Alabama (basically broke the law), who could read (again, against the law for blacks to be literate), and headed down to Mexico. He returned the U.S. 5 years later in 1866.


What Romney's ancestors did 125 or so years ago - has no relevance to me. Salon is certainly free to publish what they want -

But I'd prefer they publish what he was doing during the Summer of 1968 in France (his mission instead of fighting in Vietnam). And I'd prefer they RE-PUBLISH his statements from 2008 about why his sons were doing their duty for America by staying home . . . yet he remains firmly 'pro war' when he has not one clue about what that means to a member of the military and their family.

My point - thanks for posting this article. But we have plenty of reasons to NOT want this man to be President based upon his own beliefs, lack of character, and not being an 'all out guy' who goes to the mattresses for his beliefs (in regards to Military Actions).

[Kalidurga]

3. I agree I don't care what his family did 125 years ago,

I am not sure I care what he did in 1968 either, except that he hasn't apologized for it. Not to us, but to the pro war people that support him. It appears he has had the spine of a jelly fish for quite sometime, so I am glad he is on the other side, he could have stuck to his guns and said that Vietnam was wrong and most people wouldn't have a problem with that. But, no he glosses over his failure to serve and now is pro war, this makes no sense.

[RZM]

4. So Mitt's great grandfather went to Mexico to raise his 'Romnitos' by different women . . .

Who gives a shit?