Anyway, the six remaining presidential contenders were invited to speak. The Democrats declined, but the four Republicans acepted. The big news is that Mitt Romney used his speech to drop out of the race. Things were looking pretty bad for him after Tuesday, so there is no point in wasting any more of his personal fortune.
John McCain gave his speech today, too. Given how much many conservatives dislike him, and considering he actually declined an invite to speak last year (no joke), he's getting a good reception. Here is the text of his whole speech. It's his usual stuff.
What interested me is what he said about immigration. As usual, he offered no contrition for his amnesty bill and the way he and his Senate buddies tried to ram it through Congress:
Surely, I have held other positions that have not met with widespread agreement from conservatives. I won't pretend otherwise nor would you permit me to forget it. On the issue of illegal immigration, a position which provoked the outspoken opposition of many conservatives, I stood my ground aware that my position would imperil my campaign. I respect your opposition for I know that the vast majority of critics to the bill based their opposition in a principled defense of the rule of law. And while I and other Republican supporters of the bill were genuine in our intention to restore control of our borders, we failed, for various and understandable reasons, to convince Americans that we were. I accept that, and have pledged that it would be among my highest priorities to secure our borders first, and only after we achieved widespread consensus that our borders are secure, would we address other aspects of the problem in a way that defends the rule of law and does not encourage another wave of illegal immigration.
There is so much here that he's not being honest about that I have to try to rebut it all like a shotgun, spraying everywhere:
You don't "respect [our] opposition". You and your surrogates basically went around calling us a bunch of racists last year. You say you know we were principled, but that is the opposite of what you were saying at the time. How about an apology for that, at least?
The bill was not about "restor[ing] control of the borders". You just HAD to jam down our throats a bill that coupled amnesty with enforcement, rather than enforcement only like the House of Representatives had already passed.
You only accept that it almost killed your campaign (and I wish it had), and you want to be president so badly that you'll change your position to the bare minimum necessary to fool people who didn't follow the debate that closely the last few years.
You also didn't try to convince us of the merits of your bill. That's why it was negotiated in secret for months and sent directly to the Senate floor without even going to committe, and during Memorial Day week. The whole thing reeked of slipping one past the American people.
There is no way that an amnesty would NOT encourage another wave of illegals, so since he still wants anmesty (but would not dare say so), he's either lying or stupid. Neither speaks well of his Straight Talk.
What it comes down to is that the only even nominal change to his position is that he says repeatedly that he will "secure the borders". However, he has said there is no need for a fence along the border and that it can be done with sensors and other technology. Unless that technology includes guns mounted on posts that would shoot border crossers, it won't stop anyone. He has NEVER refuted anything else he pushed for last year.
You know, I was starting to warm up to the idea of voting for him in November. It's refreshing to be reminded of what he thinks of us who want to really end illegal immigration.
UPDATE: Here's more funny stuff from the speech:
I will not obscure my positions from voters who I fear might not share them. [Except immigration.]
I know in this country our liberty will not be seized in a political revolution or by a totalitarian government. But, rather, as Burke warned, it can be "nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts." I am alert to that risk and will defend against it, and take comfort from the knowledge that I will be encouraged in that defense by my fellow conservatives. [Except when it comes by waves of third world immigrants settling here with no one's permission...]
UPDATE 2: Picture of the day at CPAC, from Michelle Malkin (and yes, I got that issue of National Review):
UPDATE 3: Hmmm. Some guys over at NRO think this part of his speech signals a shift his position on immigration. We'll see. I'm not convinced yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment