YOUR COMMENTS

I Im from Mexico since 1963 i got mi citizenship on Agost 31 2007 .
The first thing that when you is admitted to legal is that come be liven at expenses of the tax payer , but alot of my people they even are here ilegal and they are geting food stamp and something else but what really that makes this matter worse some they are pucher , they are in gang driving drunk their cars withiout insurance . Alot of mi people they said the the ilegal is not taking the jobs of the citizen of the person the is legal . I use to work for a place where we were rebuilding ingenes this was called Ingine Supply the persons that they use to own they sold to some boy else and this people the start hiring to alot ilegal that they dont know anithing about mechanic that even the ask me oiga que es lo que corre por aqui agua o aceite any way they broke the company and from 140 persons 85 were ilegal by the way one time one young guy that was working by my side he tald me this in spanish OIGA DON VICENTE ESTOS CABRONES NO QUIEREN PAGAR MAS Y YO LE DIJE SI A TI NO TE JUSTA COMO CRES QUE LES CAIGA A LOS GRINGOS QUE LES REBAJARON EL SUELDO DE 2 A 3 D OLARES POR HORA Y AL QUE NO CORRIAN LO HACIAN CORRER COMO QUIERES QUE SE SIENTA QUE HORA ESTARAN HASTA PERDIENDO SUS CASAS Y SI POR BIEN ES HASTA CON PROBLEMAS CON LAQ FAMILA .the I tald him if you dont like this what yoy tink how the gringos feel when the company diduct from 2 to 3 dollar per hour ., SOME THEY GOT FIRE OR THEY MADE
- Vicente Loera Mier, 817 E. Linda Lane Gilbert, Az 85234

About the oil problem I got idea since 1956 I read in Ridest Digest Magazine in spanish that the oil was going to last 100 years then later come out a articule what said Nosotros tenemos un carro por cuatro personas what I dont remember how many was sayig there were in rusia this is what I wrote to Mr. McCain in 2005 that I tald to one techear of the Maricopa communite Colledge when I was studing mechanic I know the treack the ingland made that they did in Kuait when they find that there was oil I know that this country was paying one dollar for a barrel of oil to Saud Arabia before the 1967 war . The population we know that is 5% of this world if was going to split the oil production acording how many we are our share will be about 3.5 million barrel a day . But lets just go with the oil that is produce on this country that is about 5.8 million a day the we were less than one gallon of gasoline per day.
- Vicente Loera Mier, 817 E. Linda Lane Gilbert Arizona 85234

Living in Senator McCain's state, where he has been a member of the Senate for over half my life-time, I can state simply that he is the Beltway's consumate insider. If voters want a President who believes that the D.C. status quo can work, that making deals that compromise core beliefs is okay, then Senator McCain does know how to work that Machine. If voter's believe that that Machine can work to accomplish the "change" they seek, then either Senator McCain or Senator Clinton are by far the best selection.

If voters believe that that Machine is fundamentally broken, then they should look for the candidate who can bring a fresh perspective and proven private and public sector executive experience to the Oval Office. An Independent in Arizona.
- Darrin J. DeLange, Phoenix, Arizona

I wonder if all the people who are against illegals have a clear understanding of our Mexican immigration policy and how flawed it is. There are millions of terrific Mexicans contributing to the American way and they should be citizens. Just look at the last names of people in our military and the names of the people working in Az.
- John Keogk, Scottsdale, Az

Mitt Romney tried to do what an honest journalist, if one was available, would do; extract and explain the differences in policy between the candidates. Romney did an admirable job in clearly summing up real and important distinctions in fewer words than this post while millions of words by so-call "journalists" ignore even the most mundane analysis.

Romney explained that while it's possible, in a purely semantic way, to argue that what the McCain/Kennedy bill did wasn't amnesty if it included conditions and the existence of those somehow didn't purely fit with the use of that word. But he also accurately reckoned that many, if not most, people would judge it to be amnesty because it wasn't that different. In fact that has already proven to be true. McCain said that his bill did not reward illegal immigrants but any truthful, logical analysis would show that to be false.

Why is that these debate arguments, which dealt with the extremely crucial point of amnesty, something that has dominated the illegal immigration discussion in the country, were completely omitted by the reporter in favor of exchanges that offer little to help voters understand the differences between the candidate in regards to the policy direction of the country? Gotcha may be a fun game for political reporters but here was a chance to clearly elucidate real policy differences so that people can use their vote to push the country in the direction they desire.
- Jeff Sanders, Santa Cruz, CA

I'll tell you up front I'm a Ron Paul supporter. However, it's because I've done a lot of research on the doctor/Congressman. If I were to base my support on the very few soundbites harvested from a debate like last night's, I would be wondering why he doesn't assert himself more...why he didn't remind the audience that he's a medical doctor and tell them his experiences in the healthcare quagmire...he's a 10-term congressman from a border state - why didn't he assert his plans for dealing with the illegal immigration issue.

Luckily, Romney and McCain (as well as Huckabee and Thompson to some extent) looked like school children taunting each other on the playground, complete with eye rolling and silly laughs behind barbs. Giuliani - unfortunately - came out rather clean and unscathed.

Congressman Ron Paul is still my man, but you have to look beyond the debates to study the man and his principles and policies.
- Jan Stearns, Thornton, NH

They are all attacking Mitt Romney because he is the best one for the job and they know it. He has succeeded in eveything he has touched from his family to his fortune and quite frankly the political machine GOP old guard doens't really know how to deal with that. Yes, he has changed his views, but he's honest about it and he has my vote. I am an American with moderate views with a masters in mass media studies. I have done my research on all those running and Mitt Romney is the best pick for the GOP...
- Kristy Donner, Indianapolis, IN

The Union Leader is doing a disservice to the voters of NH by not providing context to Romney's responses to the attacks, only printing the attacks themselves. Fred tried to attack ROmney on healthcare, and in turn itt outlined his plan. Fred apparently wants federal government to take over healthcare, because he belittles the state by state plan put together by Romney and instituted here in Mass. McCains attacks were responded to accordingly with policy and definition of policy, something that is not shown in this article. It's unfortunate that the Union Leader is demonstraqting tremendous bias through the utilization of selective quotes. I am no Romney fan, but there was more to his repsonse than "that's a personal attack" each time he was targeted. to read this piece is to mislead on the context of the debate.
- marc nofler, boston, ma

The two best parts of the Republican debate last night that stood out in my mind were: 1) when Charlie Gibson showed the clip of President Bush talking about principles and then went through each of the candidates commenting on how they each have changed their principles and positions to suit their needs and/or self interests. However, when he got to Dr. Ron Paul the only thing he could say was that he changed party affiliation (which is NOT his principles). (And to set the record straight, he's been a republican official for all of his 10 terms in Congress and only changed affiliation in his 1988 bid for President.) Regardless of that, if this is the only thing he can say about Ron Paul, then people need to understand and realize that Ron Paul is the most principled person running and that he WILL NOT change his positions when in office, whereas the others (who have a history of doing so) most likely will. And 2) There was a point when Ron Paul was talking about following the Constitution and the audience could not contain themselves and started to clap and cheer. This sudden outburst of enthusiasm is complete proof that this country wants a president that will stay commited to the RULE OF LAW and not violate it's principles. RON PAUL is the only candidate who has a history and voting record that reflects this commitment; to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution and the Rights of the People. So my question is, why is it that the others don't have the same record, if that's what they took an oath of office to do? Why aren't they talking about it more in the debates and advertisements (except for Fred Thompson who I feel only refers to the Constitution out of convienence because I don't feel conviction in his remarks)? How can we trust their word, oath or promise to the American people when they constantly change their views and positions based on what seems to be the flavor of the month?
- Paul Comeau, Candia, NH

If Guiliani actually believes that our foreign policy has had nothing to do with why Bin Laden and his supporters hate us, he's a complete moron. Apparently the attacks on Sept. 11 were not enough incentive for him to actually educate himself about this issue. Electing him as president will ensure that the hatred for the U.S. in the Middle East not only continues, but increases dramatically.
- Ann Pelletier, Dover, NH

The surge is working, Bin Laden needs to be captured, more trrops need to be sent, illegals need to be verified or go home, health cae should not be mandated, and taxes should go down, not up. This is a smart vote for a Republican: Guiliani/McCain.
- Lance Harris, Brentwood, NH

The essential difference between the position of Huckabee, McCain and Giuliani on one side and Romney and Thompson and the other is where the undocumented would likely be living at the end of their presidential term.
The first group of Presidential candidates sees the undocumented as "new Americans". The latter feel that the undocumented should show respect to the Americans and the people of their home country. An undocumented resident of the United States should commit themselves to their legal country by going back there and working to succeed there. They should not be cutting in line in front of their patient law abiding fellow citizens if they want to get back in to the U.S.
- Richard Bond, Arlington, Ma

When are people going to stand up and say we don't need a guest worker program. John McCain and Rudy think we should give a special path to citizenship to illegals already. With unemployment rising the last thing we need to do is increase the labor pool. We should end illegal immigration and and allow people's wages to catch up to the rising cost of living. This problem is as much a worker exploitation problem as national security issue. Mitt Romney is the only candidate in this race who seriously wants to slow down the effect this problem on our overall economy.
- Chris Buda, Merrimack

I was a Romney supporter when he ran for Governir of Massachusetts. In fact, I even served in his Administration. He was a huge disappointment as Governor. He accomplished little and only seemed interested in running for President after a few months. Massachusetts had the second worst performing economy in the nation - in terms of jobs - during his term. When he says he "changed" Massachusetts - it is absurd. He raised effective take rates through surcharges and fees on individuals and businesses and he increased layers of government by adding needless "super-cabinet" positions. If Romney was an "agent of change" in Massachusetts, it was change for the worse. I'm glad that the other candidates and the people of New Hampshire are exposing Gov. Romney for what he is - a charlatan.
- Pete Abair, Watertown, MA

The more I read about Romney, the better I like him -- which is not the case for Huckabee, McCain, Obama or Mrs. Clinton. Here are some impressive facts on him: JD/MBA graduate cum laude from Harvard; hugely successful businessman; reversed the $379 million 2002 Winter Olympics scandal into a $100 million success (& gave back his salary doing it and he has promised to do the same with his salary as President); also turned the $1.2 billion deficit into a surplus as Governor of Massachusetts and on and on... In my opinion, Mr. Romney is just what we need as President of the United States of America. I like him well!!

Romney's turn-around of the Olympics held in Utah was amazing. We need someone to do the same to Washington before we and our children are mortgaged to untenable financial policies.
- Leland Anderson, Cambridge, MA

The former Arkansas governor earned his Huckster nickname as well as a great YouTube moment of shame when he challenged Romney’s support of the troop surge during ABC’s New Hampshire debate.

The YouTube clip shows exactly how dishonest Huckabee is. Two weeks after Romney issued a January 2007 press release supporting the surge; the Huckster does an interview deliberately distinguishing himself from other candidates by withholding support.

In the Jan. 24, 2007 interview on MSNBC’s “Live,” Norah O’Donnell asks:

“We have a Rudy Giuliani, who supports the president’s plan on Iraq. We have Governor Mitt Romney, who also supports a troop surge. How are you different from any of those candidates?”

Huckabee: “Well, I’m not sure that I support the troop surge, if that surge has to come from our Guard and Reserve troops, which have really been overly stretched.”
- Doug LeDuc, Fort Wayne, IN

Ron Paul looked like the only serious candidate on the stage at the ABC debate. He was the only candidate discussing the root causes of the problems facing America, and the only candidate prescribing a new and more sensible way to fix them.

If you want a candidate who is against the war, and for smaller government, and against illegal immigration, and for civil liberties, and won't turn health care into a government-run boondoggle, Ron Paul is your only choice -- in either party.

Please stand up for freedom, prosperity, and peace, and show America on Tuesday that Ron Paul can win. We will be forever in your debt.
- Doug Daniels, Lake Forest, California

My analysis of debate deduced Romney having won the debate on points, but certainly it was no lnockout. Thompson and Paul accorded themselves reasonably well, excepting Thompson's barbs directed towards Romney. As for these incessant attacks, the remaining candidates looked sophmoric and their responses to questions were amgiguous at best. Romney and Paul made the greatest attempts to clarify positions with Thompson providing acute, but overly general, responses. Again, Romney wins on points earned by his arguments and his ability to withstand excessively childish behavior exhibited by his opponents, which was entirely directed towards him in an unnecessarily personal nature.
- Gregory Wood, Brooklyn, NY