Posted on 06/02/2007 2:31:25 PM PDT by Reaganesque
This is almost sad. I would also say it’s disappointing, but in fact it’s oh-so-predictable. John McCain has decided that the best way to sell his vision of immigration reform to the Republican electorate is to criticize his critics. The Boston Globe reports:
In a major speech on immigration Monday in South Florida, McCain will have tough words for critics such as Romney who haven't proposed anything of their own, according to advisers.
We’ll momentarily bypass the fact that the Boston Globe is apparently continuing its policy of willingly serving as hand-maiden to whomever happens to be Mitt Romney’s biggest foe on a given day. This comes as no shock.
The real issue here is McCain’s contemplated response. And lest you think the Globe has gotten its facts wrong, an email from the McCain campaign is whipping around the internet that excoriates Mitt Romney on immigration while not deigning to defend McCain/Kennedy. The title of that email? “WHAT THEY'RE SAYING: MITT ROMNEY ON IMMIGRATION.”
Speaking honestly here, and straight from the heart, I can’t believe the McCain campaign is so blind. Republican voters detest McCain/Kennedy. They hate the way the bill’s proponents have “sold” the bill even more so. The primary selling method, from the White House on down, has been to attack the bill’s critics.
Here’s what the misguided salesmen don’t get, and I’m including the president in this assessment. Only 26% of the public supports the bill. Democrats hate it almost as much as conservatives. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that the bill is wonderful and people just oppose it because they don’t understand its particulars (a tough case to make since the only people who seem to have read the bill are people who don’t like it like me and Hugh), why do the bill’s proponents think it’s a successful tool of persuasion to insult the people with whom they differ?
Fortunately for George Bush, he won’t have to endure the Republican electorate’s wrath over the immigration compromise. But if he did, he would find out that sending out his lackeys to call members of his own party Nazis would not be a winner. (I can’t win. Andrew Sullivan implies I’m a Nazi; the administration implies I’m a Nazi. Is there anyone out there who doesn’t think I’m a Nazi?)
Unlike Bush, McCain is seeking the approval of the Republican electorate. I know the McCain campaign doesn’t generally care for my advice, but I’ll offer it anyway: The only way to set things right between your candidate and the Republican base is to convince the base that McCain/Kennedy is a good bill. I happen to think that’s impossible since it’s so dreadful, but obviously Senator McCain disagrees regarding the merits of the bill or else he wouldn’t be pushing it so hard. It would be unimaginable that the Senator would put his name on a piece of legislation just to get himself before the klieg-lights where he could soak up the adulation of his friends in the media. Right?
McCain has responded to this crisis with the kind of petulance we’ve all gotten used to over the past several years. He has attacked using emotion, rather than defend using logic. In a perfect world, we could assume that if McCain were to give a major address on immigration on Monday, he would devote his energies to defending the bill he’s crafted.
But as we all know by now, that’s not how John McCain rolls.
As for Mr. Barnett's critics calling him a Nazi, I would remind him of what P.J. O'Rourke said: "I have often been called a Nazi, and although it is unfair, I don't let it bother me. I don't let it bother me for one simple reason. No one has *ever* had a sexual fantasy about being tied to a bed and sexually ravished by someone dressed as a liberal."
“John McCain has decided that the best way to sell his vision of immigration reform to the Republican electorate is to criticize his critics.”
Yep, John, that’ll work. I recommend you make it your primary campaign strategy.
In a major speech on immigration Monday in South Florida,
Any idea where in South Florida McLame might give this speech?
I may like to show up with a sign saying McLame wrong and not just on immigration.
No idea. The McCain website might have that info.
It was from the Romney Michigan Headquarters and its no surprise that Michiganders for Mitt wouldn’t know anything about it, they aren’t connected to the Romney campaign.
As far a McCain having anything to do with sending it out, that is laughable because the email was sent to the sterling list through a company called Constant Contact.
The Michigan Romney Campaign is run by the Sterling Corporation.
Their direct competition in political campaigning in Michigan is run by Chuck Yob who is backing McCain.
Its laughable because Yob wouldn’t hire Sterling to send anything...lol.
You may find some information in this Weekly Standard article helpful on determining the political climate in Michigan.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/368gtpeb.asp?pg=2
The entire article is well worth a read.
Is McCain’s campaign a fish or is it simply foundering??
I hate going there but I’ll try.
Maybe I’ll be on the news tomorrow gtting yelled at by a RED faced McLame.
I’ve noticed that when Mitt Romney gets attacked, there is a very good chance that he will use that attack to his advantage and turn the tables. I thought he did this real well with Al Shapton’s attack.
Very interesting article. Thanks! Sounds like Michigan politics are very similar to Massachusetts politics in all the worst ways.
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NDFjOGY4ODIxNmZlZmJlNGUzNDZiMzNhMGU4MGQ1YmU=
In a major speech on immigration Monday in South Florida, Any idea where in South Florida McLame might give this speech? I may like to show up with a sign saying McLame wrong and not just on immigration.Speech on immigration, 10 a.m., Biltmore Hotel, Coral Gables, FL -- according to:
Romney has proposed.... okay, well, he hasn't proposed anything, just attacked McCain and used it as a ploy to avoid discussing where he (Mitt) stands on immigration.
But asked last week how he would change the bill, Romney demurred. "I'm not, here, going to describe language of a piece of legislation," he told reporters in Lakeland, Fla. "I'm not a legislator, at least not currently, so I'm not going to give you legislative language." link
WEASEL.
When a Lakeland Ledger reporter asked him about immigration in an interview, Romney said he was "not really trying to define what is technically amnesty." He added, "I'll let the lawyers do that."
WEASEL
Thanks
Romney has proposed.... okay, well, he hasn't proposed anything, just attacked McCain and used it as a ploy to avoid discussing where he (Mitt) stands on immigration.What are you trying to say? Be more specific, don't WEASEL out on me. :) I've heard Mitt Romney outline his thoughts on immigration reform several times. So, I would think that if a candidate were trying to avoid discussing a particular issue that he or she would avoid attacking other candidates on that issue. If indeed that was his ploy then it's an absurd one at best.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
