Posted on 05/22/2008 11:46:28 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
First, my friends, a reminder of what was printed right here on January 23, 2008:
After spearheading a disastrous, security-undermining illegal alien amnesty bill last year with Teddy Kennedy, “straight-talking” GOP Sen. John McCain claims he has seen the light. In TV appearances, he vows to put immigration enforcement first. On the campaign trail, he offers a perfunctory promise to strengthen border security and emphasizes the need to restore Americans’ trust in their government’s ability to defend the homeland.
“I got the message,” he told voters in South Carolina. “We will secure the borders first.”
But how can McCain cure citizens’ distrust when his own credibility on the issue remains fatally damaged? He doesn’t believe his own election-year spin. And he knows we know it. This is cynicism on steroids with a speedball chaser.
Not all of us have forgotten how the short-fused Arizona senator cursed good-faith opponents in his own party (“F**k you!” and “Chickensh*t” were the choice words he had for Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn during a spat over enforcement provisions). Not all of us have forgotten that he voted against barring felons from receiving amnesty benefits under his plan. Not all of us have forgotten the underhanded, debate-sabotaging manner in which McCain/Kennedy/Graham/Harry Reid conspired to ram their package down voters’ throats.
His admission of the shamnesty failure is grudging and bitter. While he now tells conservative voters what they want to hear about the need to build the southern border fence, he takes a contemptuous tone toward physical barriers when talking to businessmen. “By the way, I think the fence is least effective,” he told executives in Milwaukee, according to a recent Vanity Fair profile. “But I’ll build the goddamned fence if they want it.” Straight talk? Try hate talk.
For all his supposed, newfound enlightenment about what most Americans want—protection against invasion, commitment to the rule of law, meaningful employer sanctions, an end to sanctuary cities, enforcement-by-attrition plus deportation reform, and an end to special illegal alien benefits that invite more law-breaking–The Maverick remains a Geraldo Rivera Republican. Like the ethnocentric cable TV host who can’t string a sentence about immigration together without drowning in emotional demagoguery, McCain naturally resorts to open-borders platitudes when pressed for enforcement specifics.
And, now, straight from the campaign trail with Arnold “Move Left” Schwarzenegger, McCain has shed every last pretense that he “got the message” from grass-roots immigration enforcement proponents and is back to his full, open-borders shamnesty push. No surprise to any of you. But his complete regression back to the “comprehensive immigration reform” euphemism is a notable milestone.
Also, you don’t need to guess anymore how he would have voted on the Feinstein/Craig illegal alien farmworker amnesty:
Republican presidential candidate John McCain joined Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in calling today for comprehensive immigration reform, including guest worker visas to bring employees to California’s Silicon Valley and the state’s vast agricultural fields.
The two men brought up the issue at McCain’s prompting during a global competitiveness roundtable featuring California technology executives and entrepreneurs.
Asked by Silicon Valley panelists on what he would do to grant more visa for skilled technology workers, McCain broadly advocated the comprehensive immigration reform plan he had backed with Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy in Congress.
The same issue brought McCain intense criticism during the Republican presidential primary from conservatives who assailed him as soft on illegal immigration and an advocate of amnesty.
But today McCain, the now presumptive GOP presidential nominee, said an immigration program is needed that protects America’s borders and national security. While he called for punishing employers who hire illegal immigrants, he also advocated a humane approach that treats illegal workers as “God’s children.”
McCain said they should be allowed to seek legal status in a “humane and comprehensive fashion” through a program “they can count on and trust.”
Responding to a question about so-called H1-B visas for Silicon Valley workers, McCain said: “We have to attract the best and brightest minds. It isn’t just H1-B visas. In our agricultural sector, they can’t find workers as well. We need a temporary agriculture (worker) program.”
Schwarzenegger echoed McCain’s remarks after the Arizona senator asked his opinion on the topic.
“We need to change the system. All this is part of a comprehensive immigration reform. You can’t piecemeal this thing,” Schwarzenegger said.
While the governor said, “securing the border is extremely important” to California he added: “You have to have the courage to do this kind of immigration reform so we can bring people into this country legally.”
Schwarzenegger said he supported a pathway to legal status so that more people can have “legal drivers licenses” and “everyone would have bank accounts…and there would be background checks so that there would be no criminal element in this country.”
Same old, same old about sham background checks.
They’ve learned nothing. Nada. Zippo. How about you?
***
More from the NYT:
“Senator Kennedy and I tried very hard to get immigration reform, a comprehensive plan, through the Congress of the United States,” he said. “It is a federal responsibility and because of our failure as a federal obligation, we’re seeing all these various conflicts and problems throughout our nation as different towns, cities, counties, whatever they are, implement different policies and different programs which makes things even worse and even more confusing.”
He added: “I believe we have to secure our borders, and I think most Americans agree with that, because it’s a matter of national security. But we must enact comprehensive immigration reform. We must make it a top agenda item if we don’t do it before, and we probably won’t, a little straight talk, as of January 2009.”
I'm actually blushing! ;) Thanks, and you, too!!!
What makes you think Obama is blacker than he is RAT? He’ll do what Dems have always done for black folk: Not a damned thing past election day. I figure it really makes no difference which of these three poseurs win, we will all lose after January 20, 2009. One thing for certain, though, is that I WILL NOT VOTE FOR McCAIN. PERIOD.
Candidate Best outcome Worst Outcome Most Likely
___________________________________________________________
Obama Ineffective Catastrophic Harmful
president like president, like Clinton+
Carter. Passes worst ever, corrupting
no legislation passes health insinuates
leads to Repub care, amnesty corruptofficials
victories increases taxes throughout govt
appoints no Appoints 3 or Appoints two
judges. No harm more SC judges SC judges,
to military like Ginsberg like Ginsberg
no terror Multiple terror One terror
attacks attacks, inclu- attack, non-
One term ding nuclear nuclear
Repubs gain Two term, One term
power permanent Repubs gain
democratic power
majority,
socialism
in US permanently
Sharia law accepted
in US.
Dem's and libs
in power through
corruption.
___________________________________________________________
McCain Moves right Moves left Liberal as Ford
appoints 2 Appoints 2 Appoints 2 SC
SC like SC judges like judges like
Roberts Souter Kennedy
Completes Raises taxes Good economic
war on terror to pay for policy, inter-
by defeating global warming national policy
Builds wall Passes amnesty Dithers on
passes non- law, amnesty,
amnesty reform nationalizing accomplishes
Doesn't raise illegals nothing
2 terms 2 terms 1 term
Republicans Repubs lose Repubs minority
gain power power stays the same
permanently,
conservatives
split off
___________________________________________________________
Candidate Best outcome Worst Outcome Most Likely
___________________________________________________________
Now look at the six outcomes, pick one you must not have, and vote for the other candidate. If you don't think mine are realistic, write your own.
"Third party."
Geez... that was really easy, wasn't it?
“If you don’t think mine are realistic, write your own.
“Third party.”
Geez... that was really easy, wasn’t it?”
Um, no. Do you mean you imagine a third party will win? I can’t imagine that. And if it doesn’t, you’re left with the six scenarios I’ve scoped out.
I votem for the most conservative candidate running. Period.
"Permanent 'Rat Voting Majority." Get used to saying that, and make certain your children -- and, most likely, your grandchildren -- are fluent with the phrase as well, should Juan win. In Spanish.
This is what drives me crazy. They *aren't* talking about "bringing" people into the country legally -- they're talking about legalizing folks who are here illegally. If their goal is to make it easier for people to come here, why don't they reform the expensive, red-tape-laden, many-years-long process for folks who are following the rules and knocking at the front door? Instead, those would-be legal immigrants languish, and our government representatives devote all their efforts to rewarding lawbreakers. It's insane.
No, you expect way too much from a small, dispirited and accommodationist remnant of the once-majority Republican Congressional Caucus.
If you give a sh*t at all about this country you'd better hope for a McCain win, and hope against hope that he has coattails as well.
There are no "do-overs" in politics, and once a 'rat president lets the Pelosis and Reids run amok for four long years, and pollutes the Supreme Court with more unethical leftwing ratbastard "judges", whatever is left of our former freedoms won't be worth fighting over.
Obama isn't kidding, and he isn't playing some jerkwater pinball version of politics. He is not the perfect candidate but he is as serious as the faceless foreign totalitarians behind him and controlling him. We'd better get equally serious and quit the stupid high school Harry "strategizing." Or we're done.
Ah. So you're squarely in favor of a Permanent 'Rat Voting Majority, then.
Gotcha.
Absolutely! Why, Juan's running openly on the Permanent 'Rat Voting Majority principle (i.e., amnesty), even as we speak!
Why his supporters remain so slaveringly devoted to this same hellishly destructive principle, of course, is best left to one's own carful and considered deliberations... but, really: there aren't that many possible reasons after all, are there?
Amnesty will be passed soon no matter who becomes president so you bitcons might as well accept it and work to bring the New America into the Republican Party.
Solid conservative states like South Carolina?
Antonio, Have you met cyberella?
Now, I’m not usually in the matchmaking biz, but it is Friday of a holiday weekend ...
and well... I think you two might just hit it off.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2020335/posts?page=189#189
You might wanna give it a shot.
But do keep shilling for your treasonous scumbag Juan Mcloon. You won't convince me to vote for the amnesty embracing idiot, but I wouldn't want you to lose out on your Mcloon fun bills.
And what's this invective you keep spewing, “bitcon”? I've not seen that before, is it some sort of internal Mcloonatic shorthand or something?
I believe it's Team Juan shill-ese for "bitter conservative"; following in the fine tradition of their actual political idol, who (coincidentally) also enjoys referring to conservative voters as being "bitter" ones.
"As the root is blighted, so is the furthest branch," as they say. ;)
This, mind you, on the very thread quoting Juan as stating, baldly, he would bring about (*kaff*kaff*) "comprehensive immigration reform" no later than January 2009, if elected! ROTFLMAO!!! ;)
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.