On The Bus With McCain: Immigration

McCain Becomes A Member of the Enforcement First Crowd

By Adam C Posted in Comments (39) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

At a Haverhill townhall meeting, two questioners asked about immigration. Below are McCain's responses to the back-to-back questions.


The second question was about how long it would take to secure the border before moving on to dealing with current illegal immigrants.


Senator McCain is the well known sponsor of the McCain-Kennedy Comprehensive Immigration Reform effort. The Senator learned several lessons from its demise. First, he articulately recognizes that the main reason for failure is because people do not trust the government to secure the border. He mentions the 1986 amnesty and border security bill that lead to amnesty, but not border security. He seems to understand that voters will not make that mistake again and they want enforcement first.

More analysis below:

McCain still believes in some form of guest worker program or earned legalization, but he is fully on board with enforcement of the border first. He sees a secure border as a way to win back the trust of citizens and then he would move on to deal with the current illegal aliens in the country.

As a fellow advocate of comprehensive immigration reform, McCain's strategic change strikes me as smart. He will not win over those anti-immigrant voters who don't want more immigrants legal or illegal in the country. But those who are sympathetic to individual (and otherwise law-abiding) illegal aliens but care about the ability of government to fundamental enforce the rule of law and thus want border security before any other immigration reforms should be happy to have converted one of the biggest comprehensive immigration reform advocates.

McCain's specific idea is to require border state governors to certify that the border is secure before moving to any guest worker program. This stems from his belief that distrust of the federal government makes any federal declaration less trustworthy than a state governor.

Since Republican primary voters in NH will probably be choosing between Huckabee (Mr. White Guilt), Rudy (Mr. Sanctuary City), Romney (Mr. Flip-Flop on illegal immigration) and McCain (Mr. Earned Legalization), they will have to evaluate what the candidates have done in the past and what they would do if elected. McCain would not deport illegal immigrants and will lose some hardline votes for that stance, but he may also be the best suited to actually secure the border because no one can credibly attack him of being an anti-immigrant Tancredo type. Perhaps, McCain securing the border could be the modern form of Nixon going to China.

« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims?Comments (2) | My polling theory: back to square oneComments (9) »
On The Bus With McCain: Immigration 39 Comments (0 topical, 39 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

I also agree with comprehensive reform, but McCain's compromise position seems eminently sensible from both a policy and political perspective.

McCain is not going to win over the hard-core Tancredo voter -- but, then, none of the major candidates, Democratic or Republican, appeals to this group of voters either. McCain, however, is alone among the Republican candidates in reformulating his policy without flip-flopping or appearing to compromise his principles. His response to immigration reform also shows one of McCain's stronger traits: the ability to state that he made a mistake.

McCain is the strongest candidate that the Republican party has for the general. Incidentally, I'm not the only one or the smartest one who's saying this: Ponnuru has reached a similar conclusion. (I don't think that Ponnuru's suggestion that McCain announce that he'll serve only one term is particularly smart, but that's neither here nor there.)

For we have a peculiar power of thinking before we act, and of acting, too, whereas other men are courageous from ignorance but hesitate upon reflection.

"reformulating his policy without flip flopping"

That's a classic. I guess it depends on what the word "reformulated" means.

I think it's fair to say that his goal is the same: border security and some form of guest worker/earned legalization.

But he has changed the means to get there. Before he pushed doing them simultaneously (hence "comprehensive" immigration reform), not he is pursuing them sequentially.

For some anti-McCain/Kennedy voters, the sequential nature solves the problem of wanting Enforcement First. For others, it was the goal, not the means that was the problem.

But is changing your path to the same goal a "flip flop"? That's an interesting question.

When Romney goes from being pro-choice to pro-life, he is changing the ultimate goal. Ditto Rudy on the 2nd Amendment.

But McCain still wants to get to the same place policy-wise as he did before.

I can see why someone would call it a flip flop, but I think it is at least distinct from the Kerry/Romney version of changing your policy goal to get elected.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

of poliitcal reality. That it took the debacles of this year and 2006 for this Road To Damascus moment on enforcement-first also is concerning on a different level. McCain either is a slow learner or has been too insulated from the electorate during his Senate career.

Nonetheless, another good report from the bus, Adam.

You are changeless and eternal, or you are a flip-flopper? In that case, count me among the latter.

If you can't tell the difference between a policy change and a flip-flop then that's your own shortcoming. Just plain silly.

absentee

if we can't allow our representatives the opportunity to learn from past mistakes, we only hurt ourselves. We want them to change when they're wrong.

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

What? by von

That's a classic. I guess it depends on what the word "reformulated" means.

Your position strikes me as ridiculuous. You can't change your position without flip-flopping? Do we really want to penalize folks who change their policy in an open and direct way, as McCain did? Or do you prefer folks who simply pretend there never was a change, like [insert virtually everyone else].

For we have a peculiar power of thinking before we act, and of acting, too, whereas other men are courageous from ignorance but hesitate upon reflection.

If you favor the candidate, he is reformulating his position. If you don't he is flip flopping. If you favor the candidate so much you want to spin for him, then he is reformulating his position without flipflopping.

I thought your phrasing was rather creative. And your devotion to McCain is admirable. If you favor McCain.

my problem with McCain's change, whether reformulation or flip-flop, is that it seems to have been made for political expediency, not because he has actually changed his mind or reasons.

That kind of change is very easy to "reformulate" again, once you're in office.

He also voices his support for a "virtual" fence. His statement, roughly, "The open wastes of Arizona can be better protected by cameras and alarms. Of course, you need a physical fence near population centers." Now, what is the logic that says the system that works best isn't the one we should use near cities?

Why not have both the fence and the sensors and cameras and alarms in the desert? Wouldn't that be even better?

The reason a physical barrier is needed is because the next administration can't just turn it off with the flip of a switch. And, as Jim Pinkerton pointed out today, if those alarms were so good we could just replace our front-door locks with virtual locks and wait for the police to show up after our homes have been entered.

The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.

A recent SurveyUSA set of numbers from Oregon makes that point obliquely; as it compares Hillary to Obama asa potential presidential candidate.

“The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men."

I like how, whatever you think of his answer, it's clearly McCain out there by himself among a crowd of folks answering questions, as opposed to, you know, having all of your questions planted, like some people we may have heard of.

Anyhow, I'm uncertain if any non-extreme border security measures will work unless we allow for more legal guest workers for the same reason I'd be uncertain you can dam a river without having some water flow though the dam. That said, I hope one way or another we can get both.

John Bolton for President
"FEAR THE 'STACH!!!"

thank you

this reporting is much better than what we get in the normal news, even from conservative sources

Honestly, I have a few more ideas in mind but when I start writing one of these they are mainly stream of consciousness. I do a little grammar editing but I don't spend too much time on them. So your comment may be read as quite a damning statement to the other media sources you read.

FWIW, I think MSM reporters live with these experiences so much that they don't find them interesting. They are trying to get a candidate to say something interesting and they don't realize that the things going on around them are interesting to people who never get the chance to ride along.

The opportunity was a blessing and I'm really happy to hear that some people are getting a better feel for NH campaigning through this reporting.

I'm pondering trying to tag along with a campaign in IA in December, but I don't know who, when, or if it is possible.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Reporters always want to give us tiny snippets and then lots of their own analysis. It's much more exciting - not to mention valuable to the country - to have just the facts so we can form our own judgments.

What I wouldn't give for a newspaper whose stories gave me lots of information about "who, what, where, why, when" and saved the opinions for the editorial page.

(If you can follow along in another state, too, you will have at least one avid reader.)

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

We also need to have our immigration & employment laws enforced along with border security. I understand that some may be scared of business when talking about enforcing employment laws & punishing businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens, however I believe the upside is much more than the downside.

I like McCain, not as much as Fred, but I do like McCain. He's suffered for being a "maverick" for it's own sake, however he's much better than anyone with a "d" after his or her name...

but not in the primary.

he has terrible instincts on immigration.

he also still thinks the gang was a good idea.

he's barely my #3

Oz

Read my most recent story, "No speech from Romney is a reason to avoid him" on First Cut Politics

Wow. OK, I listened to the first video.

I heard a lot of lip service about securing the borders but two points rang out:

1) McCain seems to view this as a requirement before moving to the same amnesty that he was pushing before. Kind of a 'you have to eat your green beans before you get desert' kind of thing. That inspires zero confidence in me that he has really changed his position at all. In fact he begins his argument by saying there was already border security in the amnesty bill he was pushing, but there was no credibility which is why it failed.

Which brings us to the take home point.

2) How does McCain propose to decide that the borders are secure? He's going to ask the governors to 'certify that the borders are secure'. Is this some kind of a joke? Arnie Schwarzneggar and Janet Napolitano are going to be the bulwark of border security? As soon as they say "yep, the borders are secure", McCain says "thank you" and goes right back to his original amnesty push.

This is open borders with a transparent veneer on it. I was wrong to imply that McCain flip flopped. It seems to me that he hasn't changed positions at all, just tossed some obfuscation in front of his old position.

You want a clearly stated carefully delineated realistic position on immigration grab the issue brief off Thompson's web site. If you want amnesty and open borders, go for McCain. That's just a choice that Republicans will have to make. I'm not going to slam McCain for being for what he is for, but I disagree with it and think it concedes a huge advantage to Democrats on a key issue in the next election.

I think this criticism is closer than the flip-flop one. He wants the same goal as before.

If you think deportation is the end goal, then McCain is not your candidate. He's not trying to win Tancredo supporters.

But if you are an Enforcement First advocate, this change should be reassuring. There are many people who don't believe in deportation, but want border security before any effort to deal with those illegal aliens already here. McCain correctly notes that many in this group don't trust the government to both secure the border and deal with the current illegal aliens at the same time.

So McCain still wants both a secure border and some form of guest worker/earned legalization. But he wants Enforcement First.

If you disagree with the ends, then this should not change your view of the Senator. If the concern is a re-run of 1986 when a comprehensive reform ended without any real border security, then this shift should be helpful.

And yes the border state Governors are better situated than the federal government to have trust in saying the border is secure. Govs. Schwarzenneger, Napolitano, Richardson, and Perry are a diverse bunch with 2 Rs and 2 Ds. Plus they might change in 2010 (when all 4 are likely to be replaced by new Governors).

And the alternative is letting Congress or the President make the determination. I think McCain is smart to not empower himself (b/c there is lack of trust among border security advocates) to make that determination.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I urge you to at least recognize that most of us on the "other side" in this are not in favor of mass deportation as is frequently and erroneously implied but in favor of a reduction of the problem through attrition.

http://www.fred08.com/virtual/Immigration.aspx

I'm not expecting to miraculous convert you to Thompson here, but he states the position well. Through a series of defined actions illegal immigration becomes less attractive, resulting in reduction in illegal immigration and illegal immigrants.

It is neither fair nor accurate to distill this into a choice between amnesty and deportation. Some small number favor that, but overwhelmingly it is not the position of most Republicans who differ with you on this issue. It is about making illegal immigration unattractive as a life option, plugging the border to illegal entry, and allowing people who are here illegally to leave voluntarily. They voluntarily came here because of incentives; and they will voluntarily leave when those incentives are removed and appropriate penalties applied. Of course all plans, including McCain's include some provision for deportation, but this is not the centerpiece of the attrition approach.

For the record, I am not a Tancredo supporter. I have respect for some of what Tancredo has done, just as I have immense respect for some of what McCain has done. I would be appalled by seeing people herded into cattle cars and shipped off, as well as by seeing people breaking the law treated as if the law were superfluous. The best option is attrition. And I don't see that in McCain at all.

I'm mainly choosing between Thompson and McCain right now, although Rudy could come into the equation as well.

But illegal immigration differences aren't driving my vote. I'm a fan of comprehensive immigration reform. I think we should enforce the laws we have, but I also support more legal immigration to relieve the incentives that you describe. No candidate seems to be pushing more legal immigration as part of the solution, if they did they would gain more of my esteem.

But illegal immigration is not one of my top issues. I care more about spending, pork-barreling, corruption, small government, entitlement reform, foreign policy, and the War for starters.

I asked the Senator about his views (and took video of his responses to others) b/c the issue seems to be of utmost importance to others. And I wanted people to have a full, unadulterated view of how McCain is approaching the issue now.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I am better informed because of your actions. Not at all persuaded, but certainly better informed. My thanks to you for the videos, essay, and dialogue. Let's win in November.

I'm glad to hear that. I was not trying to persuade as I don't work with the campaign.

I do wish the blogosphere could create more original content and present it in a blogger way (less condescending than the MSM). So I find letting someone see McCain's response to an immigration question is better than a couple quotes and reporter getting "balance" quotes. That model assumes the reporter can pick the important information and context.

I encourage any diarists who are involved on campaigns to provide first-hand video/photos when possible.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

"But illegal immigration is not one of my top issues."

You may know that I have written this before, but if you look at the effects of illegal immigration, you can see that it is the biggest problem we face as a nation. It's bigger than the GWOT, bigger than the war in Iraq; because unless we address it properly, we'll be overwhelmed by it. Once that happens, there will be no solution.

Yes, stopping the inflow first is extremely important. But then following that up with a clear statement (by our actions, not words) that we meant what we said when our immigration laws were passed is just as important. Otherwise, we'll have abdicated control of the orderly growth of our population to outsiders.

Thompson's approach seems right to me.

The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.

John McCain is a Republican in Name Only (RINO). His liberal positions are well known, from his support and actions in passing McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance "Reform" to his opposition to meaningful tax cuts and real immigration reform.

Let us not forget that John McCain teamed up with Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid in an attempt to pass one of the most sweeping Amnesty bills ever passed by the US Senate. This was accomplished over a weekend, without any hearings, in an attempt to railroad this bill through the Senate. If not for the quick and courageous opposition to this bill by Senators Jeff Sessions and Jim DeMint, which gave the American people sufficient time to voice their opposition to this outrageous Amnesty bill, it would probably be the Law of the Land today since a compliant President Bush would have been happy to sign it.

Now John McCain, in a desperate attempt to resurrect his destroyed Presidential campaign, is going around telling everyone he has seen the light and now supports an "Enforcement Only" Immigration bill. This is an obvious flip-flop and a blatant attempt to buy votes from those that had previously written of Sen. McCain.

I certainly would urge Republican voters to nominate someone who is a real Republican and not a RINO like McCain. Any of the remaining Republican candidates are what I would call real Republicans and are worthy of consideration but I personally favor and support Rudy Giuliani as the Republican best equipped to defeat Hillary.

still defends passionately? Is that the one you mean?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22525

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

I will admit that Thompson is my least favorite Republican for the nomination, after McCain. At least Thompson didn't initiate Campaign Finance Reform and I would bet he would like to have that vote back right now.

Rudy

From the Human Events article I cited:

"More recently, Thompson, defended McCain-Feingold passionately in interviews with syndicated columnist George Will and radio talk show host Laura Ingrahm."

Also, Thompson had the good luck not to be in the Senate during the immigration debate, so he can take whatever position now that he wants without being questioned. But don't you think there's a pretty good chance he would have been on McCain's side? His votes and McCain's lined up very closely during his tenure in the Senate.

All this is to say that it's not useful to talk about RINOs and "real" Republicans when it comes to our presidential candidates. All the major contenders have diverged in major ways from conservative positions. Giuliani is certainly no exception (gun control, abortion), nor is Huckabee (raising taxes, expanding the federal government further).

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

a "passionate defense" of McC-F. It did explain what Thompson thinks should be changed in it.

I had heard the earlier statements he made saying that he would not now support it. I don't find this statement contradictory.

The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.

Enforcement First, not Enforcement Only. As the clip shows, McCain believes that Enforcement Only would be a de facto amnesty, allowing many illegal aliens to stay here in some legal limbo.

After the border is secure, he wants to deal with those who are here already. That's Enforcement First, not Enforcement Only.

And the fact that a Rudy supporter considers McCain a RINO is just about as silly a thing I can think of (and this coming from someone who is open to voting for Rudy in the primary).

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

After the border is secure, he wants to deal with those who are here already. That's Enforcement First, not Enforcement Only.

It's only partial enforcement first and it fails the smell test.

McCain's "new, improved position" ignores enforcement of violations in the workplace until after the borders are "certified" as secure. It is easier, and less costly, to secure a border that isn't so attractive to breach, so enforcement talk that stages workplace sanctions after the border work is done is just another ruse to get to some sort of amnesty that isn't called by its proper name.

This is all just a new "I've seen the light" semantic twist on the same raw deal he's been selling for years.

If you believe that a fully-executed enforcement only plan would leave all that many in legal limbo, you haven't been paying attention to the mass exodus of illegal aliens from just about every place that has passed a local ordinance to make it tough for them to remain.

There's a whole lot of "we can't" in the words of those who have backed off the travesty that was "comprehensive reform." We can run little robots around on Mars. We dug the Panama Canal. We can extend human life spans. But we can't deal with 20 million illegal aliens?

Balderdash!

We can do anything we put our commitment and effort behind. What McCain is still preaching is just more phony defeatism cloaking an agenda. He still wants the same end results he did before.

And as I see it, he really doesn't care what side-effects he leaves for our children to deal with. If for one instant I thought that as president he would put the interests of my child's future before the interests of an alien or a cut-corners, cheap labor junkie business conglomerate, I'd not be so vehemently opposed to his candidacy.

But the bottom line is that I sincerely don't believe he cares about my child, or my family or my heritage. And there is nothing he can do at this point, after all the horrible things he's tried to do, that will ever change my opinion of him.



Better be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident security. --Edmund Burke

Blog: TMYN

Mexico needs some serious reform. I don't know what we can do to persuade them to grow their middle class, privatize major industries (particularly oil) and change their thinking from short-term solutions, but those are the things that need to happen.

At the beginning of September, I was in Costa Rica, my first time outside of the US. Costa Rica has a solid middle class and a reasonably mature economy. This is how they've afforded to thrive without a military, even during the Sandinista era of the 1980's. I don't hear about many illegal aliens from Costa Rica and I've certainly never met one here.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

"guest worker/earned legalization."

Uhhhhhh, yeah, . . . .

Its called "get the HELL out and get in line BEHIND all the more deserving folks who have been in line, FOLLOWING THE RULES, and are waiting LEGALLY to enter."

Sheesh. This is NOT rocket science.

but the Senator did say at one point this weekend that those here should never be allowed to jump in front of those who are signed up to come in legally.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Neither is "Gee, you know, water is running over the top of the dam. Maybe we should let a little more water through the dam's waterways so it won't run over the top so much."

John Bolton for President
"FEAR THE 'STACH!!!"

Mr. McCain, we ALREADY HAVE a temporary worker Visa for agricultural workers, with NO limits on the number that can be issued, EVER. Its called the H2-A visa.

Again, sheesh. This is NOT rocket science.

Dole was old.

--------------------
Vista really sucks!

"There isn't a man alive who hasn't wanted to boot an infant." - W.C. Fields

Have all of you forgotten McCain's "Bananas" speech? Dang, you people have short memories. He told us to call his amnesty whatever we wanted, including bananas. He insulted our intelligence. He basically told us that he and he alone (with his wiley little democratic friends) knows what is best for the American people.
Don't forget and don't forgive.
Immigration is the issue that most affects our nation today. It affects all those lesser issues such as health, taxes, environment, education, etc, and etc.
You call yourselves conservatives. Well, act like it and vote for the real conservative.
Vote:
TANCREDO for President!

McClintObama Amnesty Plan: 20 million illegal alien voters by 2010

February 1, 2008

by William Gheen
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)
www.alipac.us

Have GOP Voters forgotten that just a few months ago, John McCain stood hand-in-hand with liberal icon Ted Kennedy pushing for the largest amnesty for illegal aliens in American history? While Rasmussen polling showed that Americans following the legislation very closely opposed it 3 to 1 (69% to 23%), McCain ignored the massive public outcry!

The angry calls rolling into the Senate offices, including John McCain's, were between 50 and 100 to 1 against McCain and Kennedy's bill. We know this because we stood outside his door counting calls received by his staff and because other Senators told us the ratios they were receiving. History was made when the Capital phone system shut down, due to overload of calls from angry Americans.

John McCain refused to listen to Americans and went so far as to call members of the Senate who refused to support the McKennedy Amnesty "Racists"! John McCain showed no regard for American voices and instead called those who disagreed with him petty names. Who was John McCain listening to? He was listening to the US Chamber of Commerce and the racist illegal alien support groups like La Raza (The Race) whom he openly coordinated the effort with.

John McCain has illustrated in dramatic fashion that when he feels safe in his office, he couldn't care less about what a majority of Americans think.

Now, John McCain claims he is listening because he wants to be President in a few months. He says he will "Secure the Border First!" Even if you could trust John McCain, which you cannot, his border security pledge will be quickly reduced to irrelevance, if his desire for Amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens becomes a reality.

Barrack Obama brags about how he worked with Senator McCain for "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" amnesty. If the GOP voters allow McCain to win the primary, they will be denying Americans any real choice against Amnesty in November. Unless an independent candidate enters the race, our choice will be between Clinton, Obama, or McCain all pushing for Amnesty from the White House, just like Bush!

Some conservatives will hold their nose and vote for McCain out of fear of the Democrats, others will go third party. Many conservatives would not vote for McCain at gunpoint!

The Republican Party will not be destroyed, if the McCain, Obama, Clinton Amnesty becomes a reality. Each party will race to replace American voices in their ranks, with the twenty million new voters who were recently illegal aliens. Does this surprise anyone who is knowledgeable about how American homes, jobs, tax dollars, limited health care resources, and finite seats in schools are being given to illegal aliens as well?

Any border security promised by McCain will quickly fade into irrelevance beneath the political weight of America's new race based voting block of legalized illegal aliens. What hope will Americans have for border security or immigration enforcement once this happens? The answer is clear... NONE!

Seventy Seven percent of Americans oppose licenses for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million illegal aliens will be eligible for licenses within a few years.

Over seventy percent of Americans oppose taxpayer benefits and welfare for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million illegal aliens will be turned into citizen voters and will be eligible for welfare and all taxpayer benefits.

Over 80 percent of Americans oppose in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million legalized illegal aliens will qualify for in-state tuition.

Under the McClintObama plan, employers will only have to worry about hiring the next twenty million illegal aliens flooding the country, in response to the Amnesty provided to the most recent wave.

John McCain supports Amnesty. If you have any doubts, then ask yourself why his campaign has deployed open borders fanatic, Juan Hernandez to secure the Hispanic vote for McCain.

Juan Hernandez is a dual citizen of Mexico and America. He used to work for Mexican President Vicente Fox by reaching out to and organizing illegal aliens from Mexico inside the US. Hernandez is known for his stance called, "Mexico First". He is a regular on national television, where he flagrantly advocates amnesty and Open Borders with Mexico.

Juan Hernandez is the face of the McCain's campaign to Hispanic voters and he did a great job delivering the Hispanic vote in Florida to McCain!

There are two main reasons McCain is winning the GOP Primary right now. One is the anti-illegal immigration vote is split up between Romney and Paul, who appear to be sincere in their "No Amnesty" pledges. The anti-illegal immigration vote is also splitting to Mike Huckabee, who truthfully supports Amnesty and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, but is a very skillful liar. Huckabee is deceiving voters by mailing out endorsment cards from lone Minuteman Jim Gilchrist. The anti-illegal immigration vote is divided three ways, and the pro-amnesty vote is now collected around John McCain.

The second reason McCain is winning is that many GOP voters don't know his immigration stances, have forgotten his immigration stances, or have forgiven his immigration stances. They say, "He has changed" or "We have to stop Clinton and Obama".

John McCain has not changed or he would not have Juan Hernandez out promising Amnesty for illegal aliens. John McCain has not changed or he would not be saying, "Secure the Borders first", without getting into the part where amnesty is then passed. John McCain has not changed because he recently stated on the national news that he would still vote for his amnesty bill or sign it into law as President!

Do GOP voters really prefer to have one of their own pushing amnesty than a Democrat? I am a Republican, getting closer to independent every day, but I will say that at very least the Democrats are more honest about their pro-amnesty positions than McCain and Huckabee.

What madness, lies, or misinformation would infect the mind of a GOP voter for them to support a man like John McCain, who works openly with ultra-liberal Democrats, almost changed parties to join the Democrats in 2001, and has the worst record on immigration of any of the GOP candidates?

Why would anyone support a man who is so detached from reality that he told a booing crowd of Union workers that they would not pick lettuce for even $50 an hour!?!?!

John McCain says he knows all about securing the border because he is from Arizona. Say what? Has anyone seen the conditions in Arizona lately, where they have declared a state of emergency and fought to pass strict state laws to enforce the immigration laws, which John McCain and his DC insiders refuse to enforce?

There are good reasons why Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Laura Ingram, Hugh Hewitt, and Michelle Malkin are heavily criticizing John McCain. There are good reasons for Ronald Reagan's son, Michael to condemn the McCain candidacy. There are good reasons why ALIPAC, NumbersUSA, and almost every other organization in America fighting against Amnesty and illegal immigration, while supporting Border Security, are screaming NO to McCain!

The principles of this nation are at stake. The value of our votes is at stake. The survival of the United States, in its current form, is at stake.

We must stop the McClintObama Amnesty Plan. We must stop twenty million illegal aliens from becoming voters by 2010. We must race against time to warn every GOP voter before Super Tuesday, because we must do all we can to stop John McCain.

---

William Gheen is the national spokesman for ALIPAC (Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee) found on the web at www.alipac.us ALIPAC is a collective of Americans of every race and walk of life that are unified in their support for Border Security and enforcement of America's existing immigration laws. William Gheen is a veteran campaign consultant with over 15 years and 44 campaigns of experience. He has served GOP candidates in North Carolina since 2000, before founding ALIPAC on 9/11/2004.

http://www.alipac.us/article2920.html

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service