Open thread: McCain’s moment of truth; Update: CPAC audience stuffed with McCain supporters?
posted at 3:20 pm on February 7, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Coburn’s giving him a blowout right-wing intro. He’s on imminently. Stand by.
Update: Mostly cheers as he walks out.
Update: Boos at 3:34 as illegal immigration is mentioned, followed by cheers from his supporters to drown them out.
Update: Lots of cheers as it ends. Either he won them over or the CPAC organizers made sure to have lots of Maverick supporters in the crowd to prevent any golden moments for the Democrats.
Update: Here’s the text. Red meat galore.
Update: MKH and Geraghty liked it, Hugh Hewitt and Geraghty’s readers loved it.
Update: See my earlier update about crowd theories. We may have our answer:
We’re told from a reliable source on the ground at CPAC: “They stuffed the main room with McCain supporters. But the overflow room booed him heartily, cheered when Romney was mentioned, booed when McCain said he hopes we forgive his absence from CPAC in the past.”
Update: Even McCain-hater Tammy Bruce finds herself impressed.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
I’ll vote for McCain…for the troops and for the unborn. Give a Democrat four years and what have you got…a new group of first time voters used to the entitlements Hillary/Obama will pass with their Democratic legislatures and backed up before too long with a 5+/4- liberal Supreme Court. I’ve fought too long to throw it all away by not voting Republican for president…and besides, God may someday say to me “what did you do to protect the unborn from slaughter”, but I doubt he’ll say “how hard did you fight illegal immigration.”
deedledee on February 7, 2008 at 4:21 PM
the POW story is inspiring, given the opportunity to leave the camp and his soldiers there because his dad was an Admiral and they would use it as War Propaganda…McCain realized that and refused to leave, and stayed several more years. thats some real world, life and death stuff that “inspires”…which is all we’ll have to combat obama
jp on February 7, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Why would I complain when I already know his position on those issues? Unlike Mitt Romney who I didn’t know what he would do two years from now.
Complete7 on February 7, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Old farts are much, much more reliable voters than the “youth” group. And having the media yell about how old and crotchety McCain is ain’t gonna make the old farts too happy. Especially the military veteran old farts, who have lots of friends at bridge clubs and other places who they will talk with.
funky chicken on February 7, 2008 at 4:22 PM
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Yeah, there is that…
I’m thinking also that Hillary might be considering a Virginian, only thinking that if that’s the case, Allen *might* be able to blunt that.
But you’re right, that McCaca thing will be hard to get past
JamesLee on February 7, 2008 at 4:22 PM
I am just all excited about voting in November now – really, really energized and all that stuff. /sarcasm
SimplyKimberly on February 7, 2008 at 4:22 PM
The issue with that is that the man or woman on the bottom of the ticket will not be setting its policies. If he picks Fred Thompson or George Allen, they’ll have to agree to adopt McCain’s priorities and plans, like G.H.W. Bush did in 1980. That wouldn’t be enough for a lot of people, and the true believers would continue to heap scorn on both of them. My bet is that McCain sees himself as conservative enough, and balks at messing with his winning (so far) message by co-opting someone else’s politics. He’ll pick someone he likes and agrees with, and conservatives will have to either live with it or go elsewhere.
Big S on February 7, 2008 at 4:22 PM
You’re kidding right?
SkinnerVic on February 7, 2008 at 4:23 PM
As long as it’s not McCain I’m with ya.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:23 PM
He needs to pick someone that most Americans would be proud of as president. At his age, that should be the first consideration.
bnelson44 on February 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Make it John Cornyn and you have yourself a deal!
Gramm? Ugh!
SimplyKimberly on February 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM
TOPV [hearts] BHO, so bringing up the POW thing makes him sad because his man just can’t compare.
funky chicken on February 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM
R we having fun yet?
normsrevenge on February 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM
That doesn’t seem right to me. Candidates tack toward the center after getting the nomination, which means that candidates on the left move farther to the right. Where they begin seems quite important to me. That’s why it’s important to nominate the most conservative candidate we have, so when they do the inevitable political tack, they don’t end up too far left. McCain started out with one foot in the liberal camp. Where will that leave him in October?
Jimmie on February 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM
Delay is ripping Maverick on Cavuto right now
Big Orange on February 7, 2008 at 4:25 PM
I’m not talking about you. I’ve no doubt you understand his positions. But people on here usually tend to know a bit more about a candidate than just one or two things before they vote.
But there are people, I know for a fact, that voted for him without knowing his stances on those key issues. They voted because he was a P.O.W. or because they saw one issue they agreed with, disregarding everything else.
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Heres something that puzzles me,were was the Republican
strategy from day 1,and why is it left up to the would
be nominees to emplode on them selfs and dragging the
whole Republican party down with them!
And whats truly amazing is the fact that the Liberals
are not united,infighting continues between Irag and
Immigration. And at the rate their going,Hillary wants
the DNC to be status quo,and Obama wants a new direction
for the Liberal party,so come time for their convention
there probably will be a political bloodbath!
And to top it all off,Republicans had this election
literally handed to them on a silver platter!
canopfor on February 7, 2008 at 4:26 PM
If Hillary is nominee, he should pick JC Watts.
If Obama, who knows but someone that will be acceptable to Conservatives. or maybe Huckabee, our mr. charisma which seals the deal in the south.
jp on February 7, 2008 at 4:27 PM
She has an interest in returning to Texas (and maybe running for gov.). Some years ago, the staff at RollCall ran a poll and asked fellow staffers to answer the question with a person’s name: “_____ is no rocket scientist”. Kay got the most votes. I’ve been in meetings where she blundered badly… but no press covered the event. She would disappoint very early in the game if she was a running mate.
ricer1 on February 7, 2008 at 4:27 PM
I like his comments about immigration. He just wasn’t able to convince us how right he really was. Pretty much his statement.
I also like how he completely avoided the climate change issue and how his proposed solution will send this country back into the dark ages.
p0s3r on February 7, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Sorry, I’m not bringing the marshmellows to your campfire. By your very words, I am supposed to abandon my principles concerning McCain’s amnesty plan because it offends moderates? Give me a break! McCain’s the one who called me a racist for expecting illegals to be dealt with as criminals. His mini-me Lindsey Graham called me silly for not supporting no-questions asked amnesty.
Yet, I’m supposed to yield on my principles for the likes of McCain, Graham, and you? What about you acknowledging and respecting my views for once?
highhopes on February 7, 2008 at 4:29 PM
For the first time, I do not agree with the majority of those posting here. I live in the “Deep South” and probably more conservative that most here, but, here it comes, I am going to vote for John McCain. There I’ve said it.
I cannot vote for either of the Dem candidates. I will not stay home and I will not turn my family’s future over to Obama or Clinton.
Let the good times roll…
d1carter on February 7, 2008 at 4:30 PM
Delay is ripping Maverick on Cavuto right now
You know why right? McCain opposed pay to play politics, which was a Delay specialty.
funky chicken on February 7, 2008 at 4:30 PM
Tom Delay (on Cavuto now) says it was stacked with McCainanites.
Anyway, does anyone notice that McLib didn’t mention “global warming”? He’s a hardcore global warming warrior, and I intend to email his campaign later to say that if he doesn’t have a “second look at natural cycles”, I may just have to do the ol’ “protest vote”. I’ve railed against people doing so, but for him to be an outspoke global warmist crosses the line for me, and it’s tough to set aside just to ensure we don’t have a President Hillary or Barry.
RightWinged on February 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM
McCain has more lobbyists on his campaign than any other candidate.
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:32 PM
As I have not read all the other comments this might have already been pointed out.
From the transcript McCain says he will appoint judges like Alito. From the archives nine days ago he says he ‘might not’ appoint judges like Alito, because Alito ‘wears his conservativeness on his sleeve’.
From the transcript McCain says he will win the war in Iraq, doesn’t say how, says he’ll let the generals solve that problem. LBJ said very similar things just before he sent 500,000 GI’s to South Vietnam. His speech would have more impact with me if he had explained HOW he intended to win this fight because that would have gone a long way toward demonstrating that he understands what this fight is about.
In addition he says he ‘will not permit’ [Iran] …’to possess the weapons’.
Then he says,
and then this;
. . . Campaign Finance Reform.
Tells me everything I need to know.
rockhauler on February 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM
Yep that’s what the RINs want. You should just shut-up, send money, volunteer and bend over and take it. Screw them. They wouldn’t know a principle if it jumped upon and bit them on their wishy washy dem leaning asses.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:33 PM
…RINOs
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:34 PM
If McCain is starting from the center and needs to tact right after being defacto nominee….then ‘mushy middle’, i.e. Idiot general election voters, will be so confused. This could be interesting.
jp on February 7, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Zefferson, I’m not asking for your approval. You have the right to your opinion. If you read something else into my comments that is your mistake. I understand that whether we like it or not, liberals have the same right to a government that represents their views as we do. You’re doing much more to harm to the Republican party than John McCain ever did, IMO. Part of the problem is you keep moving the target, this “we know it when we see it” crap is getting old. Maybe there is a reason that there are no extreme right wing conservative candidates that have no intention of ever reaching out to the other side. They would be rejected as RINOs.
myamphibian on February 7, 2008 at 4:36 PM
A vote for McCain will get you the same policies as Hillary. Why let McCain ruin the already declining Republican reputation?
p0s3r on February 7, 2008 at 4:36 PM
He’s still better than Hil and Obama…
Sorry, I have to vote for what’s best for the country. He may not be good, but he’s the best we’ve got.
The 1,426,700 active duty military will have to salute Obama or Hillary.
Do any of you wish that on them?
Califemme on February 7, 2008 at 4:37 PM
“We may have our answer:”
Why is anyone listening to unnamed sources on politico?
pedestrian on February 7, 2008 at 4:37 PM
Same “reliable sources” who believe that McCain wants to dissolve the border on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations’ master plan, no doubt.
Hiney Von Pewps on February 7, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Apology not accepted. Actually..was there one?
pecan pie on February 7, 2008 at 4:38 PM
I don`t even have to read any posts here to get the feel of the room. I`ll bet I`m the only one to say I admire him for going into an overtly hostile crowd.
And I`m shocked, SHOCKED, that McCain supporters would be where McCain is speaking………..It`s almost like they`re supporting him. :-P
ThePrez on February 7, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I thought the speech was fine — nothing terribly exciting — he said all of the right things, but he’s is not inspiring at all. He may have a chance against Hillary, but Obama would bury him.
D2Boston on February 7, 2008 at 4:39 PM
McCain sux.
Having said that, I’ll probably vote for him if I’m in town that day and I’m not too busy.
jaime on February 7, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I repeat…
The 1,426,700 active duty military will have to salute Obama or Hillary.
Do any of you wish that on them?blockquote>
Well?
Califemme on February 7, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I really think that, strategically speaking for the GOP’s future, McCain should choose a black southerner if at all possible as his runningmate. Why? The Democrat race right now is highlighting an interesting schism between Hispanic and black voters. If Hillary gets the nomination on the strength of the Latino vote that is overwhelmingly with her, many black voters are going to feel threatened and disenfranchised. I’ve read so many articles about how Latinos are taking over the roles in American society that have traditionally belonged to African Americans. The Latinos are the new “majority minority,” pushing African Americans out in some ways. This may be the first opportunity the GOP has had to genuinely reach out to African Americans and make them feel like they may have a political home with us after all.
aero on February 7, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I still have serious problems with McCain and it’ll take more than one speech to change my mind about sitting out the election, but from the transcript (didn’t watch) it was a good speech and he’ll benefit from it.
Who’d have believed him if he completely reversed course on immigration reform or claimed that he’d always do exactly what conservatives wanted of him from now on? He’d be castigated as a dishonest, flip-flopping panderer, and for good reason.
Hollowpoint on February 7, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Well, I don’t think we’ll be that lucky. I’m thinking he’s already delt the VP slot to one maybe two other people already.
Furthermore, I think we don’t have leverage at this point because we let anyone who wants to vote in our primaries on our candidates.
The Good news in all this; Lunch is on Jay-Mac and its all you can eat.
The bad news; I’m sure you can guess…
liquidflorian on February 7, 2008 at 4:40 PM
Zactly.
Califemme on February 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Yes, they must be the same ones.
Nevermind the fact that even the reference of his presence got boos this morning, then all of a sudden the audience loved him tonight.
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Nope, but McShamnesty wants open borders because he thinks in his short sighted vision that it get him a couple points at the polls from Hispanics. He ignores the long term 20 million new welfare democraps it makes. He speaks of Nat’l security…that’s funny.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM
I respectfully disagree. Many of us here are conservatives, then Republicans. We’re not about keeping the party in power, we’re about getting our ideas and policies out there.
I actually believe that some people believe the best way to do this is by getting Hillary the nomination. You may disagree with them, but it isn’t fair of you to claim they’re not following there principles.
Changes won’t happen in this country if we keep electing moderates.
I could possibly change my mind if McCain has a conservative VP, but I truly believe that my vote is worth so much more than throwing it away for the lesser of two evils. If more people felt this way, we might actually have a chance at a general election with three or four choices.
Esthier on February 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Since he’s going to be our guy come election day, I wish I did too, but I don’t.
Esthier on February 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM
I like Cornyn better…I thought he did not have enough experience for the VP
Ropera on February 7, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Good speech. McCain/”Not Huckabee” 2008.
phronesis on February 7, 2008 at 4:42 PM
A racist obcession with having to press “one” for english isn’t a “principle”.
Hiney Von Pewps on February 7, 2008 at 4:44 PM
For one thing, McCain has denied saying that and recently said that he would appoint judges like Alito. But even if he did say that, would you rather have John Roberts or someone appointed by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Complete7 on February 7, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I’ve got it! Sheriff Joe Arpaio for VP! he is some sort of executive…
Ropera on February 7, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Well, with McCain as the nominee now, maybe Kerry would entertain the notion of jumping ship to be McCain’s veep?
I mean, we’re about to nominate a guy who was entertaining jumping to *their* side of the aisle, surely we’d be bothered less if someone jumped *from* their side to ours to be the veep, right?
Midas on February 7, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Unless there is a miracle and the Repubs get the majority in the senate there will not be conservative justices no matter who the President is. This is a weak argument for McShamnesty.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:47 PM
And if Obama wins, the same logic applies to a woman VP.
McCain/Malkin
(but she wasn’t born in the US was she?)
pedestrian on February 7, 2008 at 4:47 PM
It might tell you something, but trust me, the average voter doesn’t have a clue about CFR, and how it has affected the small groups with little funding who want to get a message out. What John Q Voter knows is only that “reform” sounds good, and hey, it must have done some good, right?
The same with “Immigration Reform” — sounds great, but it was rotten to the core, with the burden falling, as always, on the backs of the taxpayer.
Gang of 14? Ditto. Who understood the nuance of that except those who closely follow politics?
McCain specializes in back-door, complicated legislation that the average voter doesn’t understand if it can’t be explained in less than three sentences.
Nichevo on February 7, 2008 at 4:48 PM
Too conservative for today, apparently. And really, electability is all that matters. Do we have a left-leaning non-white female of ambiguous ‘preferences’? Not that there’s anything wrong with any of that, obviously – but since we’re clearly not concerned with issues or principles, why not fully buy into to the democrat pathos and get with the identity politics!
Midas on February 7, 2008 at 4:49 PM
One speech at CPAC with a busload of McCain supporters in the room don’t add up to crap. If you McCain folks think that an old guy that agrees with the libs on everything but the war, something that most of the country is against, can win the general you are nuts.
echosyst on February 7, 2008 at 4:49 PM
You’re right, it was a good first step toward uniting the party. Just as electing McCain will be a good step toward uniting the country. As we see from some of the comments, some are just against either.
myamphibian on February 7, 2008 at 4:49 PM
You mean besides Condi?
pedestrian on February 7, 2008 at 4:49 PM
I don’t think your repellent comments do much to help your candidate. Very offputting. It’s hard to be persuasive and an *sshole at the same time.
jaime on February 7, 2008 at 4:50 PM
He denies supporting amnesty, too.
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Hmm, dunno – she might be too hawkish – probably ought to be anti-war just to balance out McCain’s uberconservative nature.
/sarcasm off
Aight, I’m done. It’s a defense mechanism, lest my brain fully explode. :)
Midas on February 7, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Yeah thats it. I hope you speak Spanish and have an inside track on carbon credits.
Big Orange on February 7, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Same tactics as his heroes McShamnesty and his mini me Grahmnesty. can;t win the argument smear opponents as racists. Nice.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Umm . . . yeah she was.
geckomon on February 7, 2008 at 4:53 PM
He was born in U.S. territory (Panama Canal Zone).
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 4:55 PM
We disagree in so many areas, why should this one be an exeption. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on February 7, 2008 at 4:55 PM
It’s not a weak argument, if you remember back to the confirmation of Roberts and Alito, the democrats always said that they expected a republican president to appoint a conservative judge. There is no doubt that John McCain’s appointments are going to be more conservative then Hillary’s or Obama’s. And you might not like this, but there is always the Gang of 13, that would help him get someone reasonable and conservative. That would keep the democrats from filibustering them, and democrats in red states like Webb, Nelson, etc. will vote for them.
Complete7 on February 7, 2008 at 4:55 PM
I’m suppposed to care in the face of all of this “McShamnesty the Manchurian Candidate” bulls**t?
Shame on you for affecting a moralistic pose with me.
You may not have absorbed this lesson of the last 48 hours yet: the GOP isn’t required to persuade the Michael Savage fanboys, who are in fact a stain and an embarrassment to the party.
Hiney Von Pewps on February 7, 2008 at 4:56 PM
Lefty troll or just a typical RINO McShamnesty supporter?
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 4:57 PM
I would really like to know why does Sen McCain only mention Justices Alito and Roberts? What about Justices Scalia and Thomas? The latter are certainly well qualified in the conservative, strict interpreters of Constitution.
Are only the more recent appointments mentioned, perhaps because Sen McCain’s record in earlier times are not so conservative?
Weebork on February 7, 2008 at 4:57 PM
1. Pandering at a conservative conference he missed last year will not unite the party.
2. Electing a man who’s only conservative principle is supporting the war will do nothing to unite a country that is mostly filled with people who have no more patience for the war.
3. Republican and Democrats were united in their opposition to amnesty. McCain as the nominee surely won’t help the unity there either.
4. People in the comments here do not value unity over their own principles. If they did, they’d be hippies singing “Kum Ba Yah” around a campfire asking why we can’t just all get along.
This is the most insipid comment for amnesty that I’ve ever read in my entire life. I wish I had a medal to give you.
Esthier on February 7, 2008 at 4:58 PM
The last time I looked, it was a “privilege” to vote. It is also my “privilege” not to vote.
I have certain expectations in the person I would vote for. My highest expectation is that my president won’t give away the right to citizenship in this great country, as if it was a door prize.
I will not vote for John McCain because he doesn’t meet my highest expectation. I do not vote for the “party,” I vote for myself and my family.
moonsbreath on February 7, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Huckabee is a moron. “Huckabee vows to press on…”
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/huckabee-vows-to-press-on-2008-02-07.html
Huck meet insignificance. Insignificance meet the Huckster.
Zetterson on February 7, 2008 at 5:00 PM
I think you’re wrong. I think McCain will nominate more Souters to show his famous bi-partisanship and avoid a fight. He seems to bend over backwards to please his buddies across the way.
jwp1964 on February 7, 2008 at 5:00 PM
And Mitt Romney denied in 2006 that McCain and Bush’s bill was amnesty. But Romney’s out, so who cares about his changing positions anymore.
Complete7 on February 7, 2008 at 5:00 PM
it’s the essential fact of this demented deformation of Reagan’s legacy which the base turned out and defeated this pprimary election.
Hiney Von Pewps on February 7, 2008 at 5:01 PM
It was just some friendly advise.
It’s usually not a good idea to come onto a conservative site and start calling people who don’t agree with you “racists”. Of course, a conservative would probably know that.
jaime on February 7, 2008 at 5:02 PM
There’s a good defense. Mitt Romney, AKA the guy everyone called a flip-flopper, said something 2 years ago. Nevermind the fact that McCain, to this day, maintains that he never supported amnesty and never will.
amerpundit on February 7, 2008 at 5:02 PM
RE: Complete7 and McCains denial. . .
This is not the first time McCain denies something when confronted with a quote. There was another one during the debates on Fox.
I guess then we have to parse McCain’s words the same way we have to parse Bill and Hillary’s statements? Are we going to argue over the meaning of ‘is’ again?
We certainly are arguing over the meaning of ‘amnesty’.
rockhauler on February 7, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Well, we’re not at election day yet, but it doesn’t seem likely we’ll agree any time soon.
So you believe that Reagan’s legacy was in slandering his opponents?
Esthier on February 7, 2008 at 5:05 PM
I now know everything about you that I need to know. Idiot.
Zetterson on February 7, 2008 at 5:06 PM
As a Mittmeister, I feel your pain. But there is a remedy to your feelings of loss and sadness: bourbon. Worked for me. Now I’m fine. Go Mac!!!
argos on February 7, 2008 at 5:08 PM
We were united on securing the border, something McCain just said he will be committed to as president. I’m not sure we’re so united on the amnesty question. While most that are here illegally should be deported without further delay, some will undoubtedly be staying. Name for me one single lawmaker that has a plan for mass deportation. To lay the entire illegal immigration debacle at McCains feet is absurdly dishonest.
myamphibian on February 7, 2008 at 5:08 PM
I will not vote for a Dem candidate and it has nothing to do with race or gender. It has to do with policies and values. I do not know what Obama stands for or what he has done. He is a great orator. Lord knows we haven’t seen that in a while. I know what Clinton stands for and what she and her husband have done. Thinking or my family, I cannot vote for either.
I do know something of John McCain. He is not perfect, he is not close to perfect. I do agree with many things he stands for, others I do not. I have not always agreed with GB but I have supported him. At this point in time, I will vote for John McCain.
All the best.
d1carter on February 7, 2008 at 5:13 PM
I do not trust him. He has never given any reason to be trusted by conservatives and is “an unreliable vote”. The only thing that would fix it, is an acceptable running mate. And he needs to do that soon, to reunite conservatives.
ultracon on February 7, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Everyone Endorsed and pushed Mitt a couple of days ago. Today Mitt drops out and McCain delivers a strong speech to CPAC that is greeted by applause. Stuffed room or not, time to play the hand we’re dealt. Obama, Hillary, Maverick or stay home. Choose.
Dash on February 7, 2008 at 5:16 PM
argos, I am really a FredHead but Mitt was my second choice. The only thing good I can say about McCain at this point is that he is half a step above Huckafool for me.
SimplyKimberly on February 7, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Hey! It’s good to know that a pandering politician will make you abandon your principles. Heh.
myamphibian on February 7, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Sen McCain is either fooling himself or attempting to fool us by suggesting the country rejected his immigration bill simply because we don’t “have trust in our government”. Uh, perhaps, Sen McCain, that we rejected it for a much simpler reason that you either fail or refuse to understand: bad law is sometimes just bad law.
He will have to do some serious rethinking if he believes conservatives are going to accept his reasoning for the failure of his bill.
As far as any need for a dopey mass deportation law, such a thing isn’t even needed. The current laws need to be enforced. Enforcing the law will drive many illegal immigrants out on its own. Passing new laws, even one that stupidly suggests mass deportation, are meaningless if current laws are not enforced.
Weebork on February 7, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Thanks. You just validated my voting intentions in the general.
a capella on February 7, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Asinine
Weebork on February 7, 2008 at 5:25 PM
Just how much bourbon does it take?
Janna on February 7, 2008 at 5:26 PM
Just did. Had some help.
a capella on February 7, 2008 at 5:27 PM
poke You forgot to bite your lip. /poke
Weebork on February 7, 2008 at 5:30 PM
And if you believe him, then you must have been asleep when he talked about the “damned fence” that still hasn’t been built.
If you want most of them deported then you are not on McCain’s side of the issue.
How about the many who would just uphold the laws we already have and allow states to actually learn whether or not the people in their states are here illegally.
And I have done no such thing. McCain has however made himself the posterboy for Amnesty just as he made himself the posterboy against free speech.
Amnesty wasn’t the first time he railed against the base. It’s just the most recent time, the one that’s still fresh in most conservatives’ minds.
Esthier on February 7, 2008 at 5:30 PM
I’ve avoided it for as long as I could endure. I know the accusation has been drained of all force and meaning by decades of lefty abuse.
It was also the case long ago that “conservatives” have adopted political correctness as an organizational model. Especially with regard to the border. any disagreement with the party line is a steep and slippery slope to bannishment.
So what does it matter? None of you are any more amenable to moderate border enforcement propositions than you are to anti-border enforcement policies. Just approaching the matter from the position that 15-20 million people cannot be “deported” as if they were 20 or 200 thousand, makes me the “enemy”. What good is it to pretend there’s any chance at persuading any of you? What do I lose by trying to tear the wool from your eyes and get you to remember that, far from being a “principle”, it wasn’t even an issue four years ago?
As a rhetoorical feingt, border enforcement zealotry, an issue which was incubated and originated with fringe left, nazi and conspiricist kooks, has been reconstructed into the euphamism “principle”.
You all can spring the word “amnesty” out like a coocoo from a clock all you want. Every time you do you look stupid in the same way a nerd who thiks his command of D&D spells means something to the other kids in the cafeteria looks stupid.
But this stupid trope alleging that border enforcement extremeism is some sort of first principle of conservative political philosophy is an abuse which is hard to endure. It’s no such f**king thing.
Hiney Von Pewps on February 7, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Weebo, McCain understands that not everyone will understand or agree with him. Something every politician deals with. He’s obviously much more grounded in reality than you are. I guess that’s why you did not address CPAC today instead.
myamphibian on February 7, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »