Report: McCain calls for comprehensive immigration reform at private meeting with Hispanic Republicans? Update: In newspaper interview, too?

posted at 12:57 pm on June 20, 2008 by Allahpundit

Exercise caution. There’s only one source, she’s a member of the Minutemen and thus perhaps inclined to look too skeptically at what Maverick says on this subject, and this wouldn’t be the first time in the past few days where the media’s exaggerated something he said at a town hall. Even so, we got a bunch of e-mails this morning about the AP wire report on last night’s “private meeting” in Chicago showcasing this quote from attendee Rosanna Pulido:

“He’s one John McCain in front of white Republicans. And he’s a different John McCain in front of Hispanics,” complained Rosanna Pulido, a Hispanic and conservative Republican who attended the meeting.

Pulido, who heads the Illinois Minuteman Project, which advocates for restrictive immigration laws, said she thought McCain was “pandering to the crowd” by emphasizing immigration reform in his 15-minute speech.

Jake Tapper must have gotten some e-mails too because he called her this morning to follow-up. Quote:

[S]he went to the meeting, a room full of 150-200 people. “Sure enough,” Pulido says, “his mantra at the meeting was comprehensive immigration reform.’ And there were cheers and applause whenever he mentioned comprehensive immigration reform.”

“Then he said, ‘I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?’ And the crowd roared. I was appalled,” Pulido said. “He was pandering to these people — that’s what they wanted to hear.”…

“He was telling one group of people one thing and the Hispanics another,” says Pulido. “I’m a conservative and I think he’s throwing conservatives under the bus.”…

What she saw of John McCain Wednesday night … makes her inclined right now to support Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin.

People are going to go nuts over the bit about Arizonans speaking Spanish before they spoke English but I suspect that was probably more of a feeble stab at “there’s more that unites us than divides us” than at the sort of promotion of cultural balkanization by government leaders that worries so many voters. Exit question: What really happened? Captain Straight Talk wouldn’t lie about a subject like this, would he? Stay tuned, because believe it or not, Team Barry’s going to go after him on it in a conference call this afternoon.

Update: The conference call is in progress and the charge of Hispandering, if I may borrow Kaus’s term, has been laid.

Update: The boss forwards this translation of an article in Diario Libre about his meeting with the editors of a Hispanic newspaper in L.A.:

New York – The Republican candidate for the White House, Senator John McCain, promised that if he wins, a day after he is sworn in as a new president of the United States, he will pressure Congress to enact a law immediately in favor of immigration reform.

The candidate that appears today eight points behind his Democrat rival Barack Obama, did the pronouncement in an interview that he granted to the Hispanic newspaper La Opinion in Los Angeles…

McCain said that it is completely false that [he] has abandoned his original commitment to fight for reform for the more than 12 million undocumented immigrants that reside in the United States and that includes the failed proposal of President Bush, to secure the borders first.

“This reform will be a priority in my administration because it is a convincing federal responsibility”, added the contender of the Republican Party. “We will undertake immigration reform and on the day after my inauguration, I will ask Congress to reconsider it, although I believe that first we have to secure our borders, set in motion a plan for guest workers that works and to focus on the issue of the undocumented in a humane and compassionate way.”

I’m mildly comforted by his willingness to tell them we need to secure the border first. Did he say that last night, too?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3

No comment.

normsrevenge on June 20, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue. The DREAM Act got sponsored by Dick Durbin, Obama’s colleague from Illinois.

Ed Morrissey on June 20, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Anyone surprised?

GogglesPisano on June 20, 2008 at 12:59 PM

“Then he said, ‘I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?

Is that really pandering? Or is it simply trying to connect with a voting segment?

I’m sayin’ the latter.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:04 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue.

So, because the Democrats are wrong, McCain should somehow be less wrong for holding the same position? How about McCain-Kennedy? Ed, you are over-dosing on McCain sugar today.

BigD on June 20, 2008 at 1:08 PM

Stay tuned, because believe it or not, Team Barry’s going to go after him on it in a conference call this afternoon.

Well that just cries out for an “audacity of…” joke, doesn’t it?

Slublog on June 20, 2008 at 1:11 PM

I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?

I bet they didn’t know this, but before senators spoke straight some of them were honest.

snaggletoothie on June 20, 2008 at 1:11 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue.

It’s not a question of McCain being better or worse, it’s a question of him pandering to conservatives during the primaries and now, perhaps, pandering to Hispanics during the general. We’ve been hammering Obama for his flip-flops and lame excuses about “overheated rhetoric”; it speaks to his credibility. So does this re: McCain. In fact, Obama talking out of both sides of his mouth was a subplot of the Bittergate incident: He’s a champion of the common man in outdoor arenas but put him in with a crowd of billionaires and suddenly he’s winking at them about small-town prejudices.

Whatever this is, it ain’t Straight Talk.

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Oy, not another McCain-immigration thread! The reflex against the words “comprehensive immigration reform” is getting kind of ridiculous on the Right. As I pointed out yesterday, at least half of polled voters have been shown to be receptive to some kind of comprehensive reform, and even to some forms of conditional amnesty. McCain is very close to the center on this issue, and he knows it. Just because the previous McCain-Kennedy bill had too many loopholes in it does not mean that future “comprehensive” reforms will be like it.

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:14 PM

There was a time,the word comprehensive, when used to describe the quality of legislation,actually meant something. Now it best describes a shotgun approach to solving a problem hoping to hit the target, rather than expending the time and energy needed to provide real solutions.

captivated_dem on June 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Stay tuned, because believe it or not, Team Barry’s going to go after him on it in a conference call this afternoon.

Of course they’re going to. And not just today. They know that McCain is full of it on this, and that it enrages conservatives. McCain has zero credibility on this, and those saying the Dems are worse is not only silly but isn’t helpful.

JiangxiDad on June 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Is that really pandering? Or is it simply trying to connect with a voting segment?

It’s trying to connect with a voting segment which feels that Arizona does not belong to America. I’d prefer pandering.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Don’t look now, McCain, but look who is paying attention to illegal immigration……….

Seven Percent Solution on June 20, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue.

Right on! As long as he didn’t murder babies! Whew.

So who cares if he isn’t honest? Ain’t no thing in comparison!

Spirit of 1776 on June 20, 2008 at 1:18 PM

SECOND LOOK AT HUCKABEE!

No, no. There shall be no second look at Huckabee.

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:19 PM

DON’T LIE ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN.

wise_man

misterpeasea on June 20, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Big S If we just go by the experience of the last thirty years there is no reason to believe that a reasonable bill will be passed or inforced. No one in Washingto has any credibility on this issue.

snaggletoothie on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Even if he didn’t exactly say what has been reported, he should be smart enough to realise things out of context won’t help him with non-RINOs and conservative independents who DON’T like his illegal immigration history and are pissed with him about other stuff. If he DID pander, then he’s easily torn apart by the Obama-squad, who will point out that it’s ‘politics as usual’.

linlithgow on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Oy, not another McCain-immigration thread!

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:14 PM

Nope. It’s not about whether McCain is right or wrong, or how many people agree with him. It’s about him telling the TRUTH about what his position his. He’s said it all. Which part was true?

Did he really get the message that the voters don’t trust the gov’t to do what it says and seal the border? That’s what he said, that he “got it.” But he’s full of it. His hubris doesn’t allow him to consider that he’s a prime example of who we don’t trust.

This is about character now, not policy. Or rather, it’s all political, from Straight Talk John. Blah blah blah.

JiangxiDad on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

What’s the Spanish for, “That’s not the John McCain I knew”?

Weight of Glory on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Then he said, ‘I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?
Is that really pandering? Or is it simply trying to connect with a voting segment?

I’m sayin’ the latter.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:04 PM

It’s actually just a pathetic dolt desperately attempting to pander.
Anybody want to buy that shithead a map?

TexasJew on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

It’s trying to connect with a voting segment which feels that Arizona does not belong to America. I’d prefer pandering.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM

If McCain had said “Aztlan will rise again!” that would be pandering. All he allegedly said was that Spanish was spoken before English in Arizona…McCain’s home state.

My history of the American Southwest is rusty, but if McCain is right, where’s the problem?

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Stay tuned, because believe it or not, Team Barry’s going to go after him on it in a conference call this afternoon.

Three words – pot, kettle, black.

The boss jumped all over this yesterday, so my caution departed the station a while back.

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:22 PM

What’s the Spanish for, “That’s not the John McCain I knew”?

Weight of Glory on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Har. Nice.

Spirit of 1776 on June 20, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue.

So if the Democrats suck, we should be cool with the Republicans sucking also? That’s the sort of thinking leading the country to ruin. Nobody wants to actually discuss the merits of anything, it’s all about scoring cheap rhetorical points on the other guys.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:23 PM

“Then he said, ‘I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?’ And the crowd roared.

I told him to say that you know. That was my idea. He is so in my pocket. I wanted him to say it in Spanish but he is much too old to learn new languages very well so I said for him to just say it in English.

VinyFoxy on June 20, 2008 at 1:23 PM

Update: The conference call is in progress and the charge of Hispandering, if I may borrow Kaus’s term, has been laid.

The Obamination knows no shame. Figures the update would post as I posted my 3-word answer :-)

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:23 PM

The Obama camp is expert on pandering. Good advice and commentary. Listen up!

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Relax, people. These were just poorly worded remarks by McCain.

Mark1971 on June 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM

There was a time,the word comprehensive, when used to describe the quality of legislation,actually meant something. Now it best describes a shotgun approach to solving a problem hoping to hit the target, rather than expending the time and energy needed to provide real solutions.

captivated_dem on June 20, 2008 at 1:17 PM

“Comprehensive” just refers to the broad scope of the legislation, and not to its quality. It seems to me that this is exactly what many on the right object to: they want a wall, deportations, and employer sanctions now, and prefer to do nothing to counteract the negative effects those policies will have on the availability of labor, or the burden on law enforcement here in the USA.

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM

VinyFoxy, just remember, Obama loves you more than McCain.

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM

At this point I don’t know why anyone would DOUBT he said this, even considering the source.

McCain is dead wrong on this issue and has been pandering to this group before today – so again, there should be no surprise.

All inall, a big…”Meh”.

Getting worked up about this doesn’t even seem worth it at this point.

catmman on June 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM

McCain should fire back with, “at least I’ll have my picture taken with a latino wearing a sombrero.”

Weight of Glory on June 20, 2008 at 1:27 PM

McCain will probably come out and criticize Obama for not running a “respectful and honorable” campaign.

BigD on June 20, 2008 at 1:27 PM

SECOND LOOK AT GINGRICH!

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

My history of the American Southwest is rusty, but if McCain is right, where’s the problem?

Well technically, Dutch was spoken in New York before English was, and French was spoken in many parts of America before English, and various Indian languages were spoken all over the country before English.

But I don’t think that presidential candidates should be holding private closed meetings with Dutch seperatists.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

SECOND LOOK AT TANCREDO!

.

.

.

(No, not really)

Slublog on June 20, 2008 at 1:29 PM

As I pointed out yesterday, at least half of polled voters have been shown to be receptive to some kind of comprehensive reform, and even to some forms of conditional amnesty.

Doesn’t make doing away with the very idea of national borders right. But I suppose once half the country is finally reconciled to nationalizing the oil industry, that’ll be okay with RINOs too. After all, what could possibly be more important than beating liberals in an election — by running as liberals themselves instead of offering a real alternative?

SECOND LOOK AT HILLARY AS MCCAIN’S VEEP CHOICE!

Mike H on June 20, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Speaking before La Raza.

Now that’s pandering!

catmman on June 20, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Pandering is indignant (over Messrs Obama and McCain).

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Uh, yeah, because the Democrats have been so much better on this issue.

It’s not a question of McCain being better or worse, it’s a question of him pandering to conservatives during the primaries …

Whatever this is, it ain’t Straight Talk.
Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:13 PM

In five months, this is all going to boil down to one thing. Candidate A and candidate B

Yes. McCain is doing things that I don’t like. I have no idea what so many people here want to actually do to make the situation better. Some have suggested not voting for McCain. Awesome. All the people who vote for Obama will be counted up against all the people who vote for McCain. The person with the most voted in each state will get the electoral votes and then we tally up all the electoral votes of each state. The end result is that Obama will win. He is not ‘just as bad’ as McCain, he is worse. Not supporting the lesser of two evils guarantees that you will receive the greater of two evils. Seems like a simple A or B choice to me.

Others want to choose a third party candidate. Same result. See the paragraph just above. Some want to (legitimately) bitch at McCain. He deserves it. Can we make him realize what issues are important to us and make him change his mind? Debatable. He is who he is and the republican primary voters voted for mcCain over every other better conservative candidate that should have won. Again, in november, this comes down to a A or B choice. See my paragraph above.

In the last few months, we’ve witnessed the chaos in the democrats primaries, and now, as this is subsiding and they have 5 motnhs to heal, our own chaos (while there will be only two people to choose from in 5 months) is still gaining speed. If I get a request for money from the republican party or an individual candidate that I have disagreements with, I do not give them money and then I tell them what they can do so they can get my money to help them. I don’t bitch and complain, do nothing and then hope to think that they will see things my way and start doing what I want.

I’m all for bashing McCain while the republican candidate has not clinched the nomination. Now with every story out with McCain doing something idiotic, I would like to see bashing with an immediate suggestion as to how to make the situation better, if at all possible. So far, it seems that every single comment here and other places about how much of a POS McCain is, it goes hand in hand with ‘and I’m not going to vote for the son of a B’ and the direct result from that will be 4 or 8 years of Obama.

wise_man on June 20, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Is that really pandering? Or is it simply trying to connect with a voting segment?

I’m sayin’ the latter.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:04 PM

LOL!

FloatingRock on June 20, 2008 at 1:31 PM

It’s sad when your best hope for your candidate is that he is pandering and lying to a constituency group to get elected, then plans to do the opposite.

gmoonster on June 20, 2008 at 1:31 PM

SECOND LOOK AT GINGRICH!

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

I believe we’re up to look #5.

SECOND LOOK AT ZOMBIE REAGAN!

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:31 PM

SECOND LOOK AT NATIONAL ENEMA.

The Russian resort experts might be available, for a reasonable fee.

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM

I’m mildly comforted by his willingness to tell them we need to secure the border first.

You know it doesn’t mean anything. He says it like he’s clearing his throat.

Michelle on June 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM

But I don’t think that presidential candidates should be holding private closed meetings with Dutch seperatists.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

Bigotry.

/sarc

Spirit of 1776 on June 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM

SECOND LOOK AT TANCREDO!

.

.

.

(No, not really)

Slublog on June 20, 2008 at 1:29 PM

I don’t think there was a first look at the Tanc.

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM

“Then he said, ‘I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Spanish was spoken in Arizona before English?’

….and they spoke Apache before they spoke Spanish.

moonsbreath on June 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM

It’s not a question of McCain being better or worse, it’s a question of him pandering to conservatives during the primaries…

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Um, when exactly did McShamnesty pander to conservatives during the primaries???

Darksean on June 20, 2008 at 1:33 PM

At this point I don’t know why anyone would DOUBT he said this, even considering the source.

Again, y’all who think this way sound just like the lefty libs. “Hey look, there’s an article that says something I want to hear, so it must be true!”…

One source, and not even an unbiased one. And you doubt how anyone might not believe it?

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:33 PM

“Comprehensive” just refers to the broad scope of the legislation, and not to its quality. It seems to me that this is exactly what many on the right object to: they want a wall, deportations, and employer sanctions now, and prefer to do nothing to counteract the negative effects those policies will have on the availability of labor, or the burden on law enforcement here in the USA.

Give that liberal a cigar!

We want the wall and the enforcement now because we believe, with decades of justification, that we will not get those things from “comprehensive immigration reform”.

There is no shortage of labor in America. Even if there were, it’s not the job of government to pander to employers.

Your faux concern for our poor law enforcement people makes me want to retch. That’s scraping the bottom of the barrel and digging a hole in the ground.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Whatever it takes to keep Obama out…

right2bright on June 20, 2008 at 1:34 PM

“We will undertake immigration reform and on the day after my inauguration, I will ask Congress to reconsider it, although I believe that first we have to secure our borders, set in motion a plan for guest workers that works and to focus on the issue of the undocumented in a humane and compassionate way.”

Yeah, the “although” is essentially an apology for having to bring up border security.

Comprehensive immigration reform is McCain’s “Day 1″ priority?

BigD on June 20, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Yes thanks to my campaign advice and muchos de dolares my little old pet dog Juan is on his way to victory. Once he becomes your el Presidente he will of course turn over control of what will be your former county to me and La Raza and just serve as our figurehead per our agreement.

Once we get our amnesty we will all come to your country. We will all have at least 10 ninos and in a generation we will overwhelm and deport most of you Gringos! Some of you, if you learn Spanish real well, we might let you stay to pick our lettuce or mow our lawns or take care of OUR children in what used to be your houses.

Those who don’t learn Spanish will be deported to Alaska. That is until Al Gore’s global warming heats things up and we want Alaska too, then we will deport you all to New Orleans. It will probably all be under water by then anyway. I hope you Gringos can swim, he, he, he !!!

So give it up and LEARN SPANISH! You should probably all buy Mexican flags too and fly them in your front yard and on your pickup trucks. If you already have an American flag there it is alright if you keep it, as long as you fly it upside down and below our great Mexican flag.

Now repeat after me – I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of Mucho Grande Mexico, and to the Republic for which it use to stand, one nation under me with everything for La Raza and nothing but our leftovers for you.

And remember Gringos,

APRENDER EL ESPANOL!!!

VinyFoxy on June 20, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Um, when exactly did McShamnesty pander to conservatives during the primaries???

Darksean on June 20, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Oh, you know, when he said that he’d “learned his lesson.”

Weight of Glory on June 20, 2008 at 1:35 PM

If McCain had said “Aztlan will rise again!” that would be pandering. All he allegedly said was that Spanish was spoken before English in Arizona…McCain’s home state.

My history of the American Southwest is rusty, but if McCain is right, where’s the problem?

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:21 PM

And they spoke Apache there before that… so your point is?

Closed meeting… check…
Pandering comment…. yep…
“comprehensive reform” day one as a priority…. uh huh

Leopard changed his spots? don’t think so.

Romeo13 on June 20, 2008 at 1:35 PM

But I don’t think that presidential candidates should be holding private closed meetings with Dutch seperatists.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

Indeed, nor with any others.

Same rule applies to Messrs Obama and McCain, though.

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:35 PM

McCain’s new campaign motto:
WILL BLOW FOR VOTES!

TexasJew on June 20, 2008 at 1:35 PM

Then he said, “I bet some of you don’t know this — did you know Navajo was spoken in Arizona before Spanish?”

cthulhu on June 20, 2008 at 1:36 PM

I’m mildly comforted by his willingness to tell them we need to secure the border first. Did he say that last night, too?

As a matter of fact, except for the code words “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”, he gave the same spiel last night. Specifically regarding the illegals here, he couched that in religious terms, saying they’re God’s children too, and we have to treat them with dignity.

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Seems to me “comprehensive immigration reform’ is just a code word.

What happened to the last ‘comprehensive immigration reform’?

Sir Napsalot on June 20, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Doesn’t make doing away with the very idea of national borders right…

Mike H on June 20, 2008 at 1:30 PM

That’s just what I’m talking about. Equating McCain’s position with “doing away with the very idea of national borders” is silly, and makes those who say thinks like it seem like NAU-obsessive crazies. The issue is what to do about previous breaches of the border, and how to regulate future immigration across it.

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Again, y’all who think this way sound just like the lefty libs. “Hey look, there’s an article that says something I want to hear, so it must be true!”…

Lot’s of kool-aid drinkers here today. Sure, this must be a liberal hit piece on McCain. I mean, the sentiments expressed are so unlike him!

Alhough I’m not sure how you can say that it’s a hit piece at the same time as you insist that he said nothing wrong.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Funny, but I do remember his response to a question of whether he would sign off on Shamnesty if he won the presidency. He dodged a direct answer by saying it wouldn’t come across his desk. Now, it appears he’s saying he’ll try to reactivate the process. Smells pretty bad, and the negatives will weigh heavily against the positives he gains on off shore drilling.

a capella on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Big S-

I think you’re incorrect on this. Small business owners, independents, Americans on the whole do NOT want amnesty. A recent Rasmussen poll shows most Americans approve a system whereby employers and landlords would have to verify legitimate status of an applicant before hiring/renting. Doesn’t sound like Americans are just dandy with illegals being here. Heck, in May of this year, a CBS poll showed that an overwhelming majority of women want LEGAL immigration reduced!

Also, as snaggletooth pointed out, how many times do you have to be fooled by the government’s promises before you realise that they don’t keep them? The 60′s immigration ‘reform’, the 80′s amnesty… what will it take? In the meantime, SS is getting more depleted, Medicaid is being doled out to illegals (including the brother-in-law of my mom’s neighbour; her neighbour has tried to report him but the local govt office says it’s ‘impossible’ and hangs up), our schools are crowded, hospitals are closing, bilingual stuff is everywhere and communities are becoming insular and not integrated, people’s SS numbers are stolen and used by illegals, traffic is getting worse, the border country is trashed, wages for all unskilled labourers are down…

Get a clue, eh?

linlithgow on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Ed Morrissey on June 20, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Mccain and Obama… both the same when it comes to illegals.

upinak on June 20, 2008 at 1:38 PM

We will undertake immigration reform and on the day after my inauguration, I will ask Congress to reconsider it, although I believe that first we have to secure our borders, set in motion a plan for guest workers that works and to focus on the issue of the undocumented in a humane and compassionate way.”

Having said this to a spanish language newspaper is great. McCain gets credit in my book for that.

JiangxiDad on June 20, 2008 at 1:38 PM

It keeps seeming like I didn’t choose this candidate.

Hell, second look at Rudy.

Speakup on June 20, 2008 at 1:39 PM

VinyFoxy, just remember, Obama loves you more than McCain.

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM

We Spanish look very much down on el pueblo negro. Did not you know that senorita?

MB4 on June 20, 2008 at 1:40 PM

This reminds me of the thread yesterday about Obama flip flopping on the whole public funds thing. Nonfactor came along and ingnorantly defended the tactic by saying essentially no big deal. She mocked us for getting worked up about something nobody cares about. But she missed the point and everybody here called her out on it. Its about political arrogance. Its about being a shameless liar saying one thing one minute and then the exact opposite ten minutes later. Almost everybody beat her up for being so shameless and transparantly partisan.

Well, well, well. What have we here? Mr. “I’ve learned my lesson” saying one thing to us one minute and then turning around and saying the exact opposite thing the next. Am I the only one completely unsurprised by this?

For all of you who wish to defend Mr. “straight talk express” on this answer me this: Why did he not allow media to listen in on this event? Why was this a private meeting? If his intent was not to lie to us why not make his statements public for all of us to hear? There is no good answer for this. But there is a truth. He is lying to you. He is lying to me. He is lying to everybody else with the one tiny exception of this Hispanic group whom he so graciously meets with privately.

You see, just like Obama and public funds, this is not about Amnesty/Comprehensive Immigration sham. This is about integrity. This is about truthfulness. This is about McCain’s credibility. Anybody who is not a blind partisan can see, plain as day, both candates have zero credibility and neither one of them can be trusted in regards to anything they say on any topic. In summary, they both suck.

Zetterson on June 20, 2008 at 1:40 PM

Specifically regarding the illegals here, he couched that in religious terms, saying they’re God’s children too, and we have to treat them with dignity.

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Well, we defrauded conservatives are G-d’s children, too. And without our votes over the years, he’d be another aging flyboy getting the paper for his rich wife and scratching his old withered ass.

TexasJew on June 20, 2008 at 1:40 PM

Comprehensive” just refers to the broad scope of the legislation
Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Thereby using the shotgun analogy.

..prefer to do nothing to counteract the negative effects those policies will have on the availability of labor,

Laws on the books already address this. If the numbers need to be legitimately raised, those numbers can be amended.

..or the burden on law enforcement here in the USA.

Due to the federal neglect of both parties over the past 2 decades.

captivated_dem on June 20, 2008 at 1:41 PM

What the hell is it with McCain and Bush that illegals are the “children of God” like they’re different from everybody else?

Okay, I’m outta here. Too much McCain love on Hot Air today has given me agita.

BigD on June 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM

MB4 on June 20, 2008 at 1:40 PM

What do you mean? Endemic racism among hispanics?

LimeyGeek on June 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM

There is no distinction btw. McCain and Obama on this item, except that Obama would do it faster and easier, with a supermajority in both houses.

On the border, while it’s important, it can never be built high or dense enough. So long as there are steaks (the meaty kind) which attract the wasps, they will find a way.

The number one issue is not respecting our current laws of hiring people who’re here illegally, both in professional and other jobs. These laws are breached by our politicians on both sides of the isle, employers, chambers of commerce, all those who hire anyone. The whores are us, no matter how much we yammer. This is the crux of the matter, and for a variety of same and opposing reasons/benefits, it will not be addressed, no matter who runs/wins.

There are differences on other issues, the SCOTUS, security, taxes, WoT, and foreign policies, and prevention of socialism being most important to self.

Entelechy on June 20, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Um, with the ability to have dual citizenship, and VOTE in both elections, and gain American Soc Sec and Medicare then move back to Mexico???

Romeo13 on June 20, 2008 at 1:43 PM

Equating McCain’s position with “doing away with the very idea of national borders” is silly

No, that’s exactly what McCains position involves.

The issue is what to do about previous breaches of the border

McCain wants to grant amnesty to everyone involved, and to grant American citizenship to the illegal aliens.

and how to regulate future immigration across it.

McCain wants it to be unregulated. Given how stupid he is (and he seems to be the most stupid man in an instutition renowned for being packed with idiots) it’s possible that he himself does not understand the implications of his position. That is the case with Gitmo and oil drilling and global warming, and it may be here as well. But regardless of what he thinks he is doing, he de facto favors an open border.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:43 PM

SECOND LOOK AT GINGRICH!

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

Hell, at this point, SECOND LOOK AT BENEDICT ARNOLD!

MB4 on June 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM

And when he goes to a local reservation he will say most people don’t realize that Navajo was spoken here before Spanish.

Lets see, Hispanics at 40 million strong, should be ignored?

It is generally accepted that there were app. 7,000 Spaniards living in the southwest and California connected to all the missions during the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries long before gringos showed up. Hell Russian was spoken in CA before English.

patrick neid on June 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM

What do you expect when he still has Juan Hernandez on his campaign staff.

ScottyDog on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Illegal immigrants are only 4.9% of the workforce

Approximately 7.4 million of the 11+million illegal immigrants hold jobs

Illegal immigrants do not hold a majority of any jobs, even in labour fields:
24% of farm workers
20% of cooks
28% of drywall installers
36% of insulation workers

(from the Pew Hispanic Centre)

You were saying Big S…? If we enforced the laws and every single illegal immigrant worker left, we’d lose less than 5% of the workforce. What’s unemployment in the US now? If we needed more labourers, that’s what visas and LEGAL immigration is for.

You don’t just legalise a de facto illegal workforce because they’re HERE. You do the right thing and fill the jobs as needed; there has NEVER been ANY survey that has said Americans won’t do these jobs.

linlithgow on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Again, so many just can’t comprehend:

McCain is the GOP nominee. Obama is the Dem nominee. One of them WILL be the next POTUS.

The time to rip on McCain was during the primaries. The primaries…and I know some can’t believe it…are over. Done. Adios.

Ripping on McCain now only serves to help his opponent. Because everyone who sits out the vote and stays home and pouts about a “real conservative” GOP savior only lets another Obama vote go unchallenged.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Hell, at this point, SECOND LOOK AT BENEDICT TOM ARNOLD!

MB4 on June 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM

Weight of Glory on June 20, 2008 at 1:47 PM

SECOND LOOK AT GINGRICH!

Allahpundit on June 20, 2008 at 1:28 PM

We did that in ’98 and ran him out of the Speakership.

TexasJew on June 20, 2008 at 1:47 PM

Specifically regarding the illegals here, he couched that in religious terms, saying they’re God’s children too, and we have to treat them with dignity.

Funny how the “separation of church and state” people did not blow a gasket about that. But I suppose they understand that this “God’s children” line is a smokesecreen. Straight talk, my ass. This guy’s as big a liar as I’ve ever seen in politics.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Ed Morrissey on June 20, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Mccain and Obama… both the same when it comes to illegals.

upinak on June 20, 2008 at 1:38 PM

Well, that was really my point. Obama’s going to hammer McCain … how? At best, they’re the same, and I’d suspect that Obama won’t be building a wall or enforcing the border at all once in office. It’s not an issue on which there’s enough daylight to care, let alone hold a press conference.

Ed Morrissey on June 20, 2008 at 1:50 PM

linlithgow on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Here are a number of recent polls on immigration. My point is that “amnesty” is a loaded word, and means different things to different people. On the Right, it has largely come to mean any kind of forgiveness of illegal/undocumented immigrants, even if some conditions (learn English, pay a fine, etc.) are attached. Even if a majority of the public is against “amnesty”, they very likly have a different view of what that means than the very conservative segment of the population does. To illustrate, consider these results from the “polling report” page, which, I should note, were collected after the McCain-Kennedy brouhaha brought the issue to the forefront, and during the Republican primaries in which the issue was so polarising:

LA Times/Bloomberg, 11/30 – 12/3/07

“One proposal that has been discussed in Congress would allow illegal immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven’t you heard enough about it to say?”

Support Oppose Unsure
% % %
60 15 25

There are plenty of poll results like that, with some showing less support for similar measures, and some showing more. I won’t post them all here, but you can go look for yourself if you like. I would contend that assertions of conservative strength on this issue are greatly overstated.

Big S on June 20, 2008 at 1:50 PM

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

I think the “get out of the way” part is what many people have in mind.

LimeyGeek on June 20, 2008 at 1:51 PM

Again, so many just can’t comprehend:

McCain is the GOP nominee. Obama is the Dem nominee

No. McCain is not the GOP nominee, and Obama is not the Dem nominee.

McCain may become the GOP nominee, if we all sit around and let him. But he’s not, yet.

If he becomes the GOP nominee we need to get behind a third party run, because both Obama and McCain will destroy this country.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:52 PM

The time to rip on McCain was during the primaries. The primaries…and I know some can’t believe it…are over. Done. Adios.

Ripping on McCain now only serves to help his opponent. Because everyone who sits out the vote and stays home and pouts about a “real conservative” GOP savior only lets another Obama vote go unchallenged.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

What do you think some of us were doing during the primaries?

The difference only matters if one believes there is still a home for conservatives in the GOP. I’m not one of them, as I have the tire tracks from the Straight Double Talk Express across my back.

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:53 PM

The time to rip on McCain was during the primaries. The primaries…and I know some can’t believe it…are over. Done. Adios.

I’ve never understood this logic. Now that he’s the nominee, even if he’s clearly wrong on a particular issue, we should simply smile, genuflect and wish him the best?

Slublog on June 20, 2008 at 1:53 PM

Seems to me “comprehensive immigration reform’ is just a code word.

What happened to the last ‘comprehensive immigration reform’?

Sir Napsalot on June 20, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Exactly. We learned this at the time they tried to lie to us and then shove Shamnesty down our thoats. By definition the word “comprehensive” contradicts McCains lies about wanting to secure the border FIRST. According to John McCain there are two parts of the illegal immigration problem that must be solved, one is securing the boders (he doesn’t want to do that though), two is pathway to citizenship (ie Amnesty). The word “comprehensive”, by definition means that the two aspects of this will be solved simultaneously. It is this simultaneous tactic that will allow the swines to shove Amnesty down our thoats. All they will do is legalize everyone here (Amnesty) and the borders will remain open. If we call them on that they will say, “what? we’re doing it. Look last year we built 700 ft of fence along the border.” Meanwhile a new flood of illegals has burst through our borders setting the table for a new Amnesty 5-10 years down the road. And around and around we go.

Comprehensive = Amnesty

We cannot allow them to sneak back the word “comprehensive” into their immigration plan. We must reject “comprehensive”.

Zetterson on June 20, 2008 at 1:54 PM

McCain – Obama, proof of the one party political system.

voiceofreason on June 20, 2008 at 1:54 PM

Well, that was really my point. Obama’s going to hammer McCain … how? At best, they’re the same, and I’d suspect that Obama won’t be building a wall or enforcing the border at all once in office. It’s not an issue on which there’s enough daylight to care, let alone hold a press conference.

Ed Morrissey on June 20, 2008 at 1:50 PM

Since when has rank hypocrisy stopped a ‘Rat?

steveegg on June 20, 2008 at 1:54 PM

Ripping on McCain now only serves to help his opponent. Because everyone who sits out the vote and stays home and pouts about a “real conservative” GOP savior only lets another Obama vote go unchallenged.

Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

JetBoy on June 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Insufficient analysis. Conservatives “ripping” on McCain endears him to “centrists” and “independents.” It’s part of McCain’s strategy. Don’t blame conservatives for being pissed at McCain. It’s what McCain wants.

JiangxiDad on June 20, 2008 at 1:55 PM

Alhough I’m not sure how you can say that it’s a hit piece at the same time as you insist that he said nothing wrong.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Some can believe six impossible things before breakfast.

Sigy on June 20, 2008 at 1:55 PM

There are plenty of poll results like that, with some showing less support for similar measures, and some showing more. I won’t post them all here, but you can go look for yourself if you like. I would contend that assertions of conservative strength on this issue are greatly overstated.

Assertions of conservatve weakness on this issue are even more overstated. Just because you’re an amnesty fan, don’t project your own feelings onto the public.

One proposal that has been discussed in Congress would allow illegal immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record

Of course that question is deeply dishonest.

flenser on June 20, 2008 at 1:55 PM

In the last few months, we’ve witnessed the chaos in the democrats primaries, and now, as this is subsiding and they have 5 motnhs to heal, our own chaos (while there will be only two people to choose from in 5 months) is still gaining speed. If I get a request for money from the republican party or an individual candidate that I have disagreements with, I do not give them money and then I tell them what they can do so they can get my money to help them. I don’t bitch and complain, do nothing and then hope to think that they will see things my way and start doing what I want.

I’m all for bashing McCain while the republican candidate has not clinched the nomination. Now with every story out with McCain doing something idiotic, I would like to see bashing with an immediate suggestion as to how to make the situation better, if at all possible. So far, it seems that every single comment here and other places about how much of a POS McCain is, it goes hand in hand with ‘and I’m not going to vote for the son of a B’ and the direct result from that will be 4 or 8 years of Obama.

wise_man on June 20, 2008 at 1:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3