After endorsing Huckabee, Jim Gilchrist shocked to find he’s soft on immigration
posted at 9:47 am on December 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Obviously an endorsement he took very seriously. As Kaus has said, Huck’s tough, Krikorian-approved immigration plan is really just a variation on the Pence “touchback” plan that would require illegals to go home, wait a few weeks, then come back. I didn’t understand it nine months ago, I still don’t understand it now. Neither does Gilchrist.
Huckabee insisted [to Fox News] that “the pathway to get back here legally doesn’t take years. It would take days, maybe weeks, and then people could come back in the workforce.”
Asked by WND to respond, Gilchrist backtracked, admitting he may have been mistaken in his initial assumptions about the repatriation provisions of Huckabee’s “Secure America Plan.”
“I’m going to have to follow up on this,” Gilchrist said. “I had not seen before anything in Governor Huckabee’s plan where repatriation and touch-back could involve only days, not years.
“I personally need to talk to Governor Huckabee about this,” he added. “This issue needs to be between Governor Huckabee and me.”…
Gilchrist … stated [a few days ago], “If, in fact, there is no standing in line and waiting for legal entry, I would have a serious reservation about endorsing Huckabee.”
Note the byline on the WND story this all comes from and compare it to this book jacket. This must have been some interview. “Dude, I don’t even know you anymore.”
No matter; the only difference between President Huck and what we’ve got now will be trading a fence that won’t stop anyone for no fence at all. Second in California now, kids. Eight thin points behind America’s soon to be retired Mayor.
Update: What would President Huck say?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
…Jim Gilchrist is far more of an activist than I am.
So how come I knew what Huck’s views were long before he did?
…oh yeah, Jim doesn’t read HA. :D
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 9:56 AM
you mean people are supporting Huck without knowing anything about him?
JiangxiDad on December 18, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Translation: “I picked Huckabee because he’s a former Baptist minister. I didn’t look at his immigration policy at all.”
aero on December 18, 2007 at 10:02 AM
I’m beginning to think that nothing matters at this point in the program.
Griz on December 18, 2007 at 10:05 AM
A reversal by Gilchrist now would be catastrophic for Huck.
A come to Jesus moment if you will.
Valiant on December 18, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Many people simply want to attach themselves to a winner. Lots of his recent support can be attributed to this. I think people are now questioning his viability and his numbers should decline.
Anyway, he won’t be the nominee. we have to have FAITH!
I just hope he doesn’t split the conservatives and force a RINO like Rudy to the front.
edgehead on December 18, 2007 at 10:13 AM
That’s why I read hot air!
tlynch001 on December 18, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Huck shouldn’t even be allowed on the white house tour, let alone sit in the oval office.
BDavis on December 18, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Yeah, I’ve noticed a lot of people supporting Huck without knowing about any of his actual positions.
Who knew that “Christian Leader” ad would have so much traction?
Enrique on December 18, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Resume “Operation Wetback”
Google it
Ochlan on December 18, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Good idea, it sounds like Mitt supporters. Support him, but don’t know anything about him…but he is a helluva guy, he believes in what I believe in…I think…ahhh, doesn’t matter, he’s a helluva guy.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 10:38 AM
Well here comes r2b with another Mitt attack. This is getting so predictable. Hey r2b do you think Mitt should have to talk about that Mormanism thing?
Zetterson on December 18, 2007 at 10:49 AM
What?!? Mitt is a Mormon!!!???
Slublog on December 18, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Gilchrist was snookered. It does not say much for his intelligence and political acumen that he fell for a line that most intelligent persons could immediately see through or for any fact checking to see what Huckabee’s disgraceful past record has been on immigration.
ptolemy on December 18, 2007 at 10:53 AM
Yes you’re not alone Slublog. To some people that is a shocking realization.
Zetterson on December 18, 2007 at 10:53 AM
As to the intended content of this thread, Gilchrist is either really dumb or really smart. One of two things:
1). He is a staunch opponent of illegal immigration and out of sheer stupidity announced his support for an illegal immigrant appologist candidate.
2). Figured out exactly how to damage an illegal immigrant apologist candidate the most. He announced his support in a nice public appearance. Waited a few days. Retracted his support in a public appearance claiming that he was ever having supported him was a mistake.
If Gilchrist had the Malkins to pull off that second option he should have a monument built for him in DC. Is that just really wishful thinking on my part?
Zetterson on December 18, 2007 at 11:00 AM
re: gilcrest and the mm: the fact is, these people are retards and beneath the consideration of credible people.
jummy on December 18, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Don’t those guys love Satan?
Sincerely,
Mike Huckabee
thirteen28 on December 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
Lord, please make it be so.
From a survival standpoint, I don’t see how Gilchirst remains relevant to his own supporters if he doesn’t recant.
a capella on December 18, 2007 at 11:21 AM
He was just desperate for someone, anyone, to accept his endorsement.
Frozen Tex on December 18, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Primaries are all about momentum.
Huck has a very good ad here by the way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV8ALMGKz4k&NR=1
bnelson44 on December 18, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Looks like a supporter made that ad, not Huckabee’s campaign.
I agree that primaries are about momentum, though. The question now, though, is did Huckabee peak too soon?
Slublog on December 18, 2007 at 11:45 AM
It doesn’t surprise me that a guy who was shopping his endorsement around, didn’t bother to do anything more than a cursory search of the candidate’s website, before one of them jumped up and said “yes, we’d like your endorsement”
The big hint should have been, that he had to ask each campaign if they wanted his endorsement, odds are the one that took him up on it needed what he might be able to bring, rather than being the best candidate.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on December 18, 2007 at 11:58 AM
No public figure wants to look foolish so I doubt this was his plan. Undoubtedly Gilcrist caught so much flak from his endorsement of cHuckles that he was just looking for a face saving way to back out.
Allah was his usual sharp eyed self to catch that the author of the possible retraction article at WND is the same guy who co-authored Gilcrist’s book.
Bill C on December 18, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Huckabee cannot be trusted on immigration. Anyone else can see this. Why not Gilchrist. It is my understanding the other minutemen were not happy with Gilchrist’s backing of Huckabee.
Mark
http://mark24609.blogspot.com/
“I see the quality and caliber of our presidential nominees, and I am not impressed. It raises the question of whether this country is even able to run itself anymore.”
John Bogel – Founder of Vanguard Funds
mark24609 on December 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Not that Huck has deep pockets or that he would ever indulge in such shenanigans but, has Gilchris had money problems that recently got cleared up?
TBinSTL on December 18, 2007 at 12:29 PM
Hey Jim, you might want to check out Las Vegas some time. You might be surprised to know that there is a bit of gambling going on there. I know it is a big shock but I have heard rumors anyway.
MB4 on December 18, 2007 at 1:17 PM
Comment pages: