May 21, 2007

McCain Conference Call

I just completed a conference call with John McCain which meant to cover a wide range of topics -- but in the end focused almost entirely on immigration. Senator McCain clearly understood that the press reports of his sharp exchange with Senator Jon Cornyn had nicked his momentum somewhat, and he insisted that the exchange was overblown. He joked on a couple of occasions that he wished someone had YouTubed it so that everyone could see that it meant little, if anything.

McCain knows that this bill will be a tough sell on both sides of the aisle, but more so on his own. He says that he was "a bit disappointed" in the responses of GOP politicians to the compromise. He feels it addresses all of the party's key issues: it secures the borders, it provides triggers that keeps other aspects of normalization from coming into force before that, and it provides penalties for those illegal immigrants already in the country. He pointed out that a $5000 fine is not small potatoes for someone earning $15,000 a year.

Several bloggers questioned him on the specifics of the bill. I asked about the fence; some confusion had arisen as to whether the fencing in this bill came in addition to last year, or just reiterated last year's authorization. McCain confirmed that it did not add any new fencing over last year's bill, but said that electronic surveillance of the rural frontiers would work better than fencing, which would require far more foot patrols.

I also asked about the Bush administration's request to remove liability for previous unpaid income taxes, as reported in the Boston Globe this weekend. McCain said that he was unaware of it, and that he would oppose that change. He feels that illegals should account for all of their violations of the law if they want to achieve a legal status in the US. He also called that change "throwing fuel on the fire" and not at all helpful.

McCain also addressed the "immediate legalization" issue arising from the temporary ID cards issued on Day 1. He called it a probationary status, and a temporary status at that. Anyone who signs up for that must either progress to a Z-visa (for those choosing to reside in the US) or a Y-visa (for those who want to participate in the guest worker program). The temp status allows us to start identifying as many people as possible as soon as possible in order to benefit our national-security concerns -- but they cannot just remain in that limbo for long after the 18 months of border-security triggers come into play.

He also wanted to caution the GOP about recognizing the humanity of the issue. We could lose the Hispanic vote for a generation, despite their being a natural constituency of the Republicans due to their affinity to free-market principles and conservative social values.

A few other issues came up, notably the AMRAP armor upgrades for personnel carriers in Iraq. Here are my raw notes on those issues:

• AMRAP program – in the right place, or too much money too soon? It saves lives, and money should not be the main consideration. It works and we should get it deployed ASAP. He praised the DoD for its quick development and turnaround.

• Ron Paul, 9/11 was blowback, and prior investigations should be considered “cover-ups”. What can be done to prevent the Truther virus? He’s glad that people have the freedom to make these arguments, but it hurts when assumably credible people like Paul engage in conspiracy theories.

• Fred Kagan wrote that success should be calculated by how many of the tribal leaders switch to our side in Anbar and Diyala. McCain worries a great deal about the Maliki government. They have to act conclusively, and taking two months off doesn’t help. We need to get the fifth brigade into action in Baghdad, and we need patience and sophistication. Long, hard, and tough. Still believes this is the best strategy.

Other blogger takes: Outside the Beltway, Ann Althouse

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! I should have realized this would get the most attention:

Mitt Romney has been trying to make quite a bit of political hay out of the compromise immigration bill — he sees it as one of John McCain's key weaknesses as relates to the Republican base and a great way to differentiate himself as the One True Conservative in the race (at least until Fred Thompson jumps in).

Well, today, on a conference call with bloggers, Mr. McCain fired back at the former Massachusetts governor, who has (of course) held varying positions on immigration over the years.

"Maybe I should wait a couple weeks and see if it changes," Mr. McCain said of Mr. Romney's position on immigration this week. "Maybe he can get out his small varmint gun and drive those Guatemalans off his yard."

Hugh Hewitt calls it a "personal attack," but it points out that Romney has some credibility issues on this topic. Romney supported the McCain-Kennedy bill in its last incarnation, and in the debate said he's support normalization after border-security triggers were met, but now wants to become the leading conservative crusader against it. I'd say that McCain has a right to be irritated with Romney's posturing at this point, even if he should have rethought this quip. After all, Romney had no control over his contractor's decision to hire illegals, and in that sense Hugh is absolutely correct.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/cq082307.cgi/10026

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference McCain Conference Call:

» McCain on Immigration Bill from Outside The Beltway | OTB
I just got off a blogger conference call with Senator John McCain. The main topic, as one might imagine, was the immigration bill he and Senator Teddy Kennedy have put together. His position and mine are identical at a high level, although we likely... [Read More]

» Macsmind to McCain - No, F-K You! from Macsmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense
Evidently Senator McCain is trying to do get his mojo back through a conference call he had with “select” bloggers (meaning those who were “sensitive” to the his insights on immigration). Here is all you need to know via Capt Ed... [Read More]

» To McCain: Humanitarian Issue, my ASS. from Wake up America
Immigrants that come here LEGALLY are welcomed with open arms, but any person that, as their first act, commits a crime by entering our country ILLEGALLY should not be rewarded for it, because if they cannot respect the very first law of entering thi... [Read More]

» Joyner on McCain on Immigration from ProfessorBainbridge.com ®
James Joyner reports on a blogger conference call with John McCain on the immigration reform proposal. Go read the whole thing, but here's a few highlights:He argues that we simply must get a handle on the problem, that the status [Read More]

» MON MAY 21 Is Chris Simcox Related to David A. Simcox of CIS? from The Pink Flamingo

I learned today that my cousin, Jim has been diagnosed with what seems to be a nasty form of AML ...

[Read More]

» “Much like 90% of blacks vote Democrat, the latinos - a HUGE group of people - will vote (D).” from Right Voices
And that is how our resident liberal sees the issue.  So my question is, is that how the Democrats see the issue?  Won’t the majority of  those new citizens will be in our welfare class? Pleae take the time to read: Why Isn’t Juan Worri... [Read More]

» “Much like 90% of blacks vote Democrat, the latinos - a HUGE group of people - will vote (D).” from Right Voices
And that is how our resident liberal sees the issue.  So my question is, is that how the Democrats see the issue?  Won’t the majority of  those new citizens will be in our welfare class? Pleae take the time to read: Why Isn’t Juan Worri... [Read More]

Comments (49)

Posted by John Wilson | May 21, 2007 12:37 PM

From the sounds of this bill, the Republicans should just avoid the blame for the bill when it fails. If that's possible for this bunch of media neophytes.

Posted by physics geek | May 21, 2007 12:42 PM

We could lose the Hispanic vote for a generation, despite their being a natural constituency of the Republicans due to their affinity to free-market principles and conservative social values.

You would think that Hispanics would be a "natural constituency of the Republicans". You would, of course, be incorrect. While the Hispanics population is, by and large, fairly conservative, they continue to vote in consistently large percentages for Democrats.

Put another way, blacks families are fairly conservative in of themselves, yet the percentage of blacks voting Republican couldn't get much lower. I see exactly the same results from the Hispanics.

McCain probably wants to emphasize the "humanity" of the issue. It's about the only way in which he can try to avoid the issues which make him problematic as a GOP presidential candidate.

Posted by Roxane | May 21, 2007 12:44 PM

I contacted both my Senators (a Republican and a Democrat) telling them about my opposition to the amnesty for illegal immigrants bill. I'm particularly disgusted by the fact the illegal immigrants will not have to pay back taxes and penalties while they have used government services paid for by taxpayers.I warned both Senators that I will vote against ANY Senator from my state who supports this bill or anything that even looks like amnesty.

Posted by Sandy P | May 21, 2007 12:49 PM

He's spinning faster than a twirling dervish.

Posted by Cobra | May 21, 2007 12:50 PM

"He also wanted to caution the GOP about recognizing the humanity of the issue. We could lose the Hispanic vote for a generation ..."

I want to caution the Senator that if this bill passes we will LOSE OUR COUNTRY, FOREVER!

Posted by patrick neid | May 21, 2007 12:57 PM

he yells a profanity--really no big deal--screaming that he knows more about this bill than anyone in the room and now he acts surprised that one of the biggest bones of contention, back taxes, has been removed?

you can't make this stuff up!

electronic fences? why this continued canard. homeland security has already admitted that electronic fencing is not designed to prevent illegal immigration. it exists solely to alert authorities where illegals are choosing to cross. unless they have made major changes in this bill there were no provisions for apprehending these migrants.

Posted by TomTom | May 21, 2007 1:01 PM

McCain & Kennedy says it all. He has had some (not many, mind you) good points in his political career, but McCain has now utterly gone over to the Dark Side, a true RINO. Look for his *New Position* on Iraq any day now, too.

Posted by Lew | May 21, 2007 1:03 PM

Finally, in the very last paragraph, we get to the crux of the matter - the "Hispanic Vote"!

For the political class this is all. It is the snake curled up under the rug in every meeting and the bette noir of every consultant and party strategist in the country. Each party wants the Hispanic vote and they will sell their country and all of its hopes down the river to avoid losing their chance at getting it. They will lie and dissemble and finagle and squirm like worms on a hook to avoid casting a vote that offends LaRaza.

And the other fundamental force that's driving this train to nowhere, is the fact that absolutely no one has any trust or faith whatsoever that any conceivable set of laws will deter them from doing exactly what they want - the people be damned. They will pass whatever laws they need to look like they're doing something meaningful, and then go their merry way after all the attention moves on. Things will be authorized but never funded. Rules and prohibitions will be proclaimed and then quietly sabotaged. Laws will be passed with great fanfare and then quietly amended into impotence in the dark of night.

Its all about the "Hispanic Vote"! If you want to waste your time sifting through the entrails for something to believe in, go for it. When all this rage and storm is done however, the partisan hunger for the "Hispanic Vote" and the complete lack of trust in the political class will still be there.

Its one of the great ironies of human history that at the very time we are struggling to bring representative government to the barbarous Middle East, it is slowly dying from the slow dry rot of cynicism here at home.

Have a nice day!

Posted by Gloom and Doom | May 21, 2007 1:05 PM

Wow. So a group of people who have been flagrantly violating the law for, what, 30 years now, is going to suddenly NOT violate this law? Every last one of them will LAWFULLY identify themselves to the government, and agree to go back to their own country to stand in line and get back in?

What PLANET are these IDIOTS in Clowngress from?

Here's the simple answer: You don't HAVE to "deport" 12 million illegal aliens. Taxing their cash flow at an extreme rate will, in killing the southward flow of cash that keeps them coming here, cause them to elect to deport themselves. In the front end, we get a SIGNIFICANT boost to our government's finances, as the tax ought to be exorbitant. Then, once the illegals discover that it's no longer possible for them to ship their tax-free income down south to their families, they will VOLUNTARILY return home.

It really isn't rocket science...

Oh, and as for Hispanics being "values based" voters? We've got a MASSIVE influx of "hispanics" here in Northern Virginia, and the only result I can see from it is a vast increase in graffiti and knifings. Quality of life up here is REALLY going down hill, thanks to our "diverse" illegal immigrants.

Congress can go deport itself, frankly. We'd do better without them!

Posted by Mr Michael | May 21, 2007 1:06 PM

Wait wait wait wait wait... lemme think here.

If, say, I were a US Citizen who had amassed a huge amount of wealth, but hadn't yet been taxed on my investments, and I signed up for the new Z-visa...

Couldn't I just become a 'new person'? I mean, they only have MY word for who I am... getting somebody to say that I was his lawnboy for 10 years can't be too hard if I have tons of cash... and as I understand it, they will only have 24 hours to contest my application, right?

So what I do is I go down to the office, make an application under my 'new identity', stay out of trouble from then on, and I'm legal again?

Wow. This is going to be popular with all KINDS of folks. No WONDER the politicians like it...

Posted by AnonymousDrivel | May 21, 2007 1:09 PM

He says that he was "a bit disappointed" in the responses of GOP politicians to the compromise.

Um, Senator, we're "a bit disappointed" in your joke of a legislation, dishonest spin, and disregard for public input and normal process.

Quit wasting time selling this embarrassment, Senator. Resume your extended campaigning. The further from DC, the better.

Posted by stilichio | May 21, 2007 1:10 PM

I posted a more extensive comment with links, but that got eaten by the anti-spam system. My last such comment here never appeared, so here is an interim version:

In short, Mr. McCain is just plain wrong regarding the notion that "Hispanics favor free-market principles". They are the most pro-tax, pro-large-state demographic in the US today. Even more worrying: This has nothing to do with income, but is a basic hispanic value.

According to Pew Hispanic:
"Latinos differ from both African Americans and whites in favoring a larger government that provides more services even if it means paying higher taxes. Income does not seem to infl uence this view among Latinos. By contrast, income does seem to infl uence non-Latino views on the size of
government."

There is no way the GOP can with Hispanics while remaining a party of small government - as simple as that. And that's not even factoring in the Democrat's pandering advantages: Affirmative action, quotas, entitlements, the list goes on.

Posted by Chris | May 21, 2007 1:18 PM

Sixteen million illegal aliens are going to become eligible for welfare, medicaid, social security, and everything else. According to the Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org) , each illegal alien without a high school diploma will wind up costing the American taxpayer roughly $19,000 a year. Assuming that most are in their 40's now, in 20 years they'll reach retirement age and collectively will cost us abour 2.5 TRILLION dollars. In other words, this new amnesty bill will destroy our Social Security and Medicaid systems within 20 years.

Posted by Carl | May 21, 2007 1:20 PM

So illegal mob rule overrides "the rule of law" that Congress likes to quote to legal citizens in countless sound bytes.

No one will ever convince me that the U.S. government can effectively handle the even bigger bureaucracy required to administer this program as advertised. The stringent punitive requirements will fall by the wayside very quickly when they come to the same realization and the effect will be amnesty for all illegal aliens.

And I am most definitely against amnesty for illegal aliens.

Posted by John Quincy Public | May 21, 2007 1:23 PM

"I mean, they only have MY word for who I am..."

I whole heartedly support this. In fact, if you read the draft up at The Truth Laid Bear you will find that they are not allowed to start an inspection based on or use as evidence any claim any 'employer' may make about your legal status prior this.

Of course, if they have your fingerprints on file they'll catch on to the ruse. But I'm sure they'll be gentle. After all, look at the 'windfall profits' the undocumented felons you are trying to join are getting.

All you need is someone to lie, scotch-free, that they employed you, an 'undocumented felon' for any time prior Jan 1 this year to the present and you're in.

PS: Make sure you max your credit cards and empty your home equity first. No sense being silly about it.

Posted by JIM VERDOLINI | May 21, 2007 1:27 PM

" Senator McCain clearly understood that the press reports of his sharp exchange with Senator Jon Cornyn had nicked his momentum somewhat, and he insisted that the exchange was overblown."

Captain, come on...the only momentum McCain has experienced since he took credit for the amnesty bill is momentum down. I doubt he has double digit approval in the party this week..

Posted by M. A. George | May 21, 2007 1:30 PM

In all the comments sections of all the many blogs I read on the illegal immigration issue, there seems to be a broad and deep consensus--people are against ANY form of amnesty for illegals. If this new bill does not actually provide "amnesty", it is the duty of the leaders of the party to explain it to the rest of us. If it does, the leaders of the party are ignoring the voice of their constituents. In either case, the party leadership is failing us pitifully. Pitifully and pathetically. I guess they are just hoping that we will move on and in short time 'forget' this issue (as so many others). I do not think so. Not this time, folks. There is more anger out there on this issue than even the War.

Posted by CatoRenasci | May 21, 2007 1:34 PM

"We could lose the Hispanic vote for a generation..."

So we should support this???

Just like Republican support of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill (which would not have been passed without Republican votes) kept blacks from abandoning the party that give them freedom and the vote (until the Jim Crow South took it away) for the mess of pottage promised by the Democrats....

Riiiiight.

Posted by Nessus | May 21, 2007 1:39 PM

McCain is just another old, medicated jackass inside the Beltway.....

I'll repeat, no one is against immigration - IF and it's a big if, it's legal and in reasonable numbers. However, DC has shown again and again, that it's either unable or unwilling to control either aspect. President Bush is the worst on this issue. He simply loves Mexico and I also think he does want to see greater integration leading to a kind of North American Union. Our fathers and grandfathers fought and bled for this?

Today's immigration in a way really isn't normal immigration, it's simply about Mexico and a few other Central American countries exporting huge portions of their populations to our nation with all it's attendent negative consequences such as the sheer illegality - the fake or stolen ID's, social security numbers, driver licenses, drunk driving, etc.

These nations, especially Mexico which is a wealthy country, refuse to enter the modern world and reform themselves, so they export their peasants and yes, in Mexico's case, export their criminals, sending them north so the American taxpayer can foot the bill. I say the best way to deal with Mexico is tough love. Cut out this deal, shun them, greatly tighten the border, workplace enforcement, eventually Mexico City will get the message and hopefully reforms will begin down there.

Beltway elites have sorely miscalculated how angry Americans are. Do we want to keep out "brown people"? We do not want half of Mexico, half of Canada, half of China or half of Russia. Why? Because it's EXCESSIVE! Besides, more than a few Latinos are reluctant to assimilate and show contempt for American laws, rules and yes, the English language. Don't wanna learn English? Don't bother coming here.

Posted by John Quincy Public | May 21, 2007 1:45 PM

Fuck you Cap'n -- Don't overblow the phrase, if I had a YouTube you would have seen the jest while I typed it.

But let me explain myself as you so graciously let McCain. I understand that in your time spent interviewing
political royalty that you haven't had the time to read the draft bill and expose this Arizonan sellout for the pit viper he is. So I'll fisk a bit.

"McCain knows that this bill will be a tough sell on both sides of the aisle, but more so on his own."

A compromise, truly meant and met, means everyone comes halfway. If it's harder to sell to the GOP than the DNC then it's a Southpaw deal.

"it provides triggers that keeps other aspects of normalization from coming into force before that"

Never mind that there were triggers in 1965 and 1986 -- both Kennedy backed deals I should note -- that were quickly discarded. But further, that the normalization occurs once the Secretary certifies he's *begun* getting things done. Not after. Just started. A trigger it is. But a trigger for Russian Roulette at best.

"He pointed out that a $5000 fine is not small potatoes for someone earning $15,000 a year."

Absolutely right. Notwithstanding the recent story of the undocumented felon welding on oil rigs making far more than that. But there's the key isn't it? If this is supposed to get them out of the shadows, then such a penalty will prevent it. McCain has cut his own Benedict throat.

"but said that electronic surveillance of the rural frontiers would work better than fencing, which would require far more foot patrols."

Less? If the cameras work better, it is because they see more people. That means there are more people available to catch. That means more, not less, manpower will be needed. He just blew smoke up your Captain's Quarters.

"McCain said that he was unaware of it, and that he would oppose that change."

That, actually, is roughly correct so far as I've seen. The employer is, of course, immune. (Title VI, Sec 605)

"He feels that illegals should account for all of their violations of the law if they want to achieve a legal status in the US."

That, however, is crap and he knows it. Otherwise we wouldn't be waving the crimes they've committed thus far and still. Not least of which, McCain's and Bush's. Tell me, could anyone is this great nation knowingly and actively aid and abet 12 million (minimum) federal felonies and come out with their life intact? None, except the royalty we cast off with a simple childish scribble in 1776.

"He called it a probationary status, and a temporary status at that."

And it's still done on Day 1. That includes such chestnuts as student aid and everything else. And it kicks in if the DHS cannot respond to their allowance for a Z-Visa inside 1 business day. Given that this requires doing felony record searches of another country. Let alone a country known to actively fund and encourage this colonization. Then it ain't going to happen. It really is Day 1. Again, read the draft document.

"despite their being a natural constituency of the Republicans"

Ignoring the fact that you and he are both treating the health of this nation like a playoff game between the Broncos and Raiders... They're Catholic. So DNC prone. They're also a poor, ethnic minority. So DNC prone. And in the "best year eva!" they came out for Bush at 44%. Hispanics? GOP? No, not yours.

With all seriousness and sympathy, you really need to pick through the draft of this insanity before you spin further for those that have no interest in your own dignity.

Posted by Jim | May 21, 2007 2:42 PM

A letter by a group of Colorado legislators says it best for me:

"We support the concept of attrition by enforcement. The population of illegal aliens can be reduced over time by enthusiastic enforcement of existing laws coupled with verifiable, secure and tamper-proof worker verification ID's for all applicants for U.S. jobs coupled with vigorous workplace and border enforcement.
The so-called "triggers" in the draft Senate bill are a joke. Border security will again be relegated to a false promise while amnesty for millions goes forward. Congress should postpone any new guest worker legislation until border security is an accomplished fact, not just another broken promise"

Posted by Terry | May 21, 2007 2:44 PM

How come you didn't ask McCain that with 25 years in congress and so much corruption, how come you never turned anyone in?

Simple question never asked. McCain isn't going to win. He should just go away.

Posted by Pragma7 | May 21, 2007 2:45 PM

American citizens like citizens of any other nation of people have the basic human right to be protected from the real and perceived ravages of excessive illegal immigration. That right is not served by cowardly, vote-mongering, capitulation from our leaders of the sort the current bill and its ilk promote. This is not a republican or democrat issue - it is an American citizen issue.

So, given our leaders track record and clear unwillingness to do the right thing, as citizens, we must communicate a clear, concise, and laser-hot message to our elected officials with a ferocity that can not be ignored. That message must clearly stipulate what we expect them to do, and what expect them not to do.

(IMO we should tell them to do two easy verifiable things: Build a border fence and staff it such that illegal immigration is cut by 95% or more and is proven to be sustainable going forward; and execute the most significant crackdown on employers of illegal workers ever experienced including significant business and personal fines (for management) with jail time for the more egregious violators which will result in jobs for illegal workers to drying up significantly and allowing our economy to adjust. Once these are accomplished then we will reassess the situation and act accordingly and my assumption is that if these two are done and done well we will not have to consider bestowing citizenship upon tens of millions of foreign nationals.)

Once crafted, the simple, elegant message must be hammered home with such awesome force that the elected elites can not escape or dodge accountability and visibility. Letters, email, phone calls, bumper stickers, questions at public forum events attended by electeds, mentions on radio and TV, banners on blogs, newspaper ads, TV spots, etc., etc., etc. We must use the mediums we have relentlessly to give our leaders no quarter and no shelter from our demands.

The process is doable, inexpensive, and would be very effective. I think that realistically, that is the best hope we have.

Posted by Coffee260 | May 21, 2007 2:48 PM

McCain is though.

Posted by Neville72 | May 21, 2007 2:53 PM

"After all, Romney had no control over his contractor's decision to hire illegals, and in that sense Hugh is absolutely correct."

Wrong, Captain.

I had a substantial landscaping project done last spring and asked the three bidders to provide with their bid documentation that their employees were either citizens or green card holders.

Only one of the three could. Guess who got the work? (middle bid, BTW).

That simple request could be repeated millions of times across the country and have an effect.

Posted by brooklyn | May 21, 2007 3:14 PM

The Senator is in way beyond his head.

McCain looks tired, aged, confused on that stage.

He is far more of a flip flop than all the top candidates for the election.

His opposition to tax cuts, dealing with Feingold on that mindless bill, playing President with Judicial Nominations, the old Keating Five, etc., etc...

McCain has sunken himself as a viable Conservative Republican Candidate and should focus on the rest of his Senate career.

His excuse for poor policy, the embrace of bipartisanship is weak.

He could have been a great one, but really failed to meet potential.

Remember the trip he made to Alaska with Hillary?

Yikes...

Global warming cried McCain?

The interesting aspect which is truly attactive for Romney, is the American POSITIVE demeanor.

He is an optimist and it shows...

Has a clear accomplished record as a CEO - Governor which McCain lacks (as it is easy to be one of many, doing very little).

Also, Romney explains his Conservative embrace of sound policy with great clarity and reason.

McCain, in the face of Romney and Rudy should bow out with grace now.

Posted by Jaded | May 21, 2007 3:24 PM

McCain is the one with credibility issues and as for the humanity of the bill, give me a break what about the humanity of American citizens and lower wages that are being offered because of illegal immigrants and the humanity and health of Americans when hospitals have to go out of business because everyone they are treating has no insurance and the humanity of Americans who have had their identities stolen so a poor illegal can get documentation. The humanity argument is one way and it isn't the American way.

Posted by burt | May 21, 2007 3:34 PM

$5000 is not small potatoes for someone making $15000. However, the few hundred dollars it costs legal immigrants is probably bigger potatoes for a Mexican who has never worked in the US. It is cheap compared with the taxes they haven't paid. It is not a big deal compared to college cost debts that many Americans have.

I can remember when an Arizona senator would rather be right-multiple meanings- than president.

Good post, brooklyn.

Posted by Hard Right | May 21, 2007 3:51 PM

Virtual fence better than an actual fence? Hah!
We have one on the Canadian border and it's a joke. The cameras frequently fail, and by the time anyone responds to a tripped sensor, whoever tripped it is long gone! No wonder so many of the politicians want a virtual fence. It allows them to look like they've done something while they've really done nothing!

Posted by deagle | May 21, 2007 4:13 PM

Cap't,

Well, I guess it was bound to happen... Seems to me that you have become too mainstream to reflect the common conservative view. A shame, but tends to happen to many it seems...

John McCain is a very liberal Republican. He is strong on national defense, but other areas are suspect (as described in too many other posts).

This latest immigration bill if another disguised attempt to ram through legislation that is both great for small business and great for the Democratic party, but injurious to most others.

While you still seem conservative (maybe 60%), you seem to have lost your way. I hope that is not because you have become too "mainstream".

Get back to your roots...

Posted by Spec Bowers | May 21, 2007 4:31 PM

"McCain said that he was unaware of it"

He, himself, doesn't know what is in the bill, but he wants a cloture vote today or tomorrow and a final vote within a week. That's crazy.

If this bill is so good and he can turn people to his side with five minutes explanation, then why is he in such a hurry? Why does he oppose taking the time to let the people understand what is in the bill?

Posted by Beldar | May 21, 2007 5:20 PM

FWIW, Cornyn is "John," Kyl is "Jon." (Has there ever been a U.S. Senator with fewer letters in his name than Jon Kyl?)

Did no one ask him how he can be expected not to shout "F*** you!" at heads of state in the White House if he can't restrain himself from shouting it at senators from his own party in large-scale meetings in the Capitol Building?

I can see arguable merit to lots of arguments, pro and con, over the immigration bill. I can't see any argument to justify that explosion, nor any reason to ignore it as confirming evidence of the "temperament problem" that has dogged McCain for years.

Posted by Dunn | May 21, 2007 5:26 PM

"Conservative social values"? Hardly.

The HIspanic illegitimacy rate is 47% and climbing fast. That doesn't smack of a "family values" constituency, does it?

It is a pipe dream to think we are going to get the Hispanic vote. They vote 2 to 1 Democrat on average, and the best we could do, despite intense effort in 2004, was about 39% or so for Bush.

How insane is it to import 50 million(illegals plus family members - not counting flood of new illegals that would be encouraged by this amnesty as they have in the past) new voters into this country that will vote 2 to 1 for your opponents?

It is very unlikely that you'll change that. Sure, you MAY, but that's one hell of a gamble to take - ending your party if you cannot change an enormous demographic voting bloc. The likelihood of success is very small, but that's where we're putting our money down? Why on earth?

At the very least, even if we managed the highly unlikely and somehow managed to "convert" the Hispanic population to vote GOP, we will CERTAINLY start out behind the eight ball as we beging this massive undertaking. It will take time, and we start out, automatically, on the wrong side - putting us in minority status for good until we can *maybe* change their minds over time.

Democrats are jumping for joy over the demographic nightmare that they are trying to import into this country and sign up as voters. Why in the world are Republicans going along with slitting their own throats?

Posted by Maverick Muse | May 21, 2007 5:46 PM

"McCain confirmed that it did not add any new fencing over last year's bill, but said that electronic surveillance of the rural frontiers would work better than fencing, which would require far more foot patrols. "
?!
Enforcing current law is not the status quo, but needs to be. Electronic surveillance without foot patrols accomplishes no deterrent; it only records trespass. Without patrol personnel, electronics would only deter if the fence were hot.

Posted by The Yell | May 21, 2007 7:18 PM

Bold move, Senator, railing against Romney's black market Guatemalans. I'm surprised you had the courage to defy all those millions of Guatemalans marching in our streets waving the Guatemalan flag. I hope there isn't a backlash from the Guatemalan-American community...

Posted by Deagle | May 21, 2007 8:36 PM

Well, imagine my surprise that the grand immigration bill was put on hold! Could it really be that the people protest too much! Would that really affect the politicians that want this bill?

Draw your own conclusions - for me, it is a victory of the common citizen - I rejoice! Now is the time to push for real protection and reform.

Posted by Fight4TheRight | May 21, 2007 9:30 PM

I must be missing something here. After reading a number of these comments, I've gone back up to read what Cap'n Ed has put forth here and since a few of you made some personal attacks, I reread this piece, "McCain Conference Call" yet again.

Is this not a recap of a conference call? Is this not a reporting of what Senator McCain had to say? Where's the editorial from Cap'n Ed here that's got a number of you all riled up?

I'm still trying to see the Cap'n's jumping the Conservative ship here in this piece. The very last paragraph, quite frankly to me, seems more of a depiction of Hugh Hewitt's views.

Not to split hairs here, but to jump someone who is basically reporting the facts and the comments from a conference call or an interview, is bush league. I wouldn't defend McCain's actions here in a million years because I want to sleep tonight but I'm not about to insinuate that quoting that man's reaction to a conference call means that the reporter is concurring with everything.

I'm not gonna try and speak for the Cap'n, but at the same time, perhaps some here need to do a better job of painting a bullseye on the message rather than the messenger.

Posted by Deagle | May 21, 2007 9:36 PM

Fight4TheRight,

You would have had to follow this site for the last several weeks before my point could be understood. Sorry... Kind or a last straw sort of thing...

I still like and read the Cap'n, just not with the same enthusiasm.

Posted by Rob Crocker | May 21, 2007 9:38 PM

I wonder if Mr. McCain will add an amendment to make sure that those "immigrants" can't use any Earned Income Credit money to pay that $5,000 fine.

You may be eligible to claim the Earned Income Credit if:

* Your Adjusted Gross Income on Form 1040 Line 36 is less than $11,490 (for Single people) or less than $12,490 (for Married people) and you have no dependents.
* Your Adjusted Gross Income on Form 1040 Line 36 is less than $34,458 (for Head of Household) or less than $35,458 (for Married people) and you have qualifying dependents.

If they're only making $15,000 a year then we're possibly supplementing them.

This bill makes a complete mockery of anyone who was foolish enough to actually try and follow the immigration laws.

Posted by Rose | May 21, 2007 10:22 PM

John McCain is a capital LOSER.

Mark Levin cited references on at least 5 different flip-flops of McCains in the last 3 years or so, or even less.

One was on some portion of immigration, I forget what part, I think it had to do with him seeing no reason to need to close the borders.
One was on Guantanamo.
One was on Abortion.

I was in the car and didn't have a way to take notes.

I think the MSM has been giving McCain a slide for decades, personally.

A football field full of dead skunks would smell nicer to me.

And I have actually smelled dead skunk, before!

Posted by Rose | May 21, 2007 10:50 PM

• Ron Paul, 9/11 was blowback, and prior investigations should be considered “cover-ups”. What can be done to prevent the Truther virus? He’s glad that people have the freedom to make these arguments, but it hurts when assumably credible people like Paul engage in conspiracy theories.

*************

It's stupid to assume we can keep on functioning in Crises with these kinds of theories being floated as "TRUTH" by those who are traitorously opposed to America making a cohesive and effective response to critical situations.

These rumors are slander and are traitorous - they are NOT "CIVIL RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH" - Slander and libel is NOT a Civil Right, and neither is Treason!

Put them on trial and make them show any "EVIDENCE of "GOOD FAITH BELIEF" in their cockamaimie tall tales.

Then if they cannot show evidence to reasonably support their tall tales, either convict them of treason or of permanent insanity - one or the other, or both!

IF they have REASONABLE evidence, then put the govt agents on trial.


ALL CIVIL RIGHTS COME WITH RESPONSIBILITIES!

"You can't melt steel!" HORSEFEATHERS!!!

I've watched my father in the welding business do it with a torch, with a flame less than a half inch wide - and you ["Truthers"] think a full passenger jet full of jet fuel cannot do it???

Lock their fannies up forever - Jail or Mental Hospital - makes no nevermind to me - unless you connect them with terrorists, such as making donations to "Charities" they know are funnels to terrorists, and plenty of those "Truthers" ARE direct allies of those terrorists. If they are so connected, then full Treason and if convicted, EXECUTE!

"The people have a right to petition, but not to use that right to cover calumniating insinuations." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1808. ME 12:166

Posted by Rose | May 21, 2007 11:09 PM

This bill makes a complete mockery of anyone who was foolish enough to actually try and follow the immigration laws.

Posted by: Rob Crocker at May 21, 2007 9:38 PM

***********

This bill makes a complete mockery of being stupid enough to be born an American Citizen, and believing in the US Constitution!


"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness." --George Washington

"Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels -- men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, we may never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion." --Dwight Eisenhower


************************************
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/2006_04.htm

IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR MEXICO...
By Michelle Malkin · April 04, 2006 06:05 AM

TO:
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=papers&code=06-D_18

The Mexican solution

(Washington, D.C.): The Congress has received lots of free advice lately from Mexican government officials and illegal aliens waving Mexico's flag in mass demonstrations coast-to-coast. Most of it takes the form of bitter complaints about our actual or prospective treatment of immigrants from that country who have gotten into this one illegally - or who aspire to do so.

If you think these critics are mad about U.S. immigration policy now, imagine how upset they would be if we adopted an approach far more radical than the bill they rail against which was adopted last year by the House of Representatives - namely, the way Mexico treats illegal aliens. ...
-Continued -
********************************

Posted by Deagle | May 21, 2007 11:18 PM

Time for us to renounce our citizenship and then apply for Z-visas. Think of all the money you'll save!

Posted by Rose | May 21, 2007 11:40 PM

A letter by a group of Colorado legislators says it best for me:

"We support the concept of attrition by enforcement. The population of illegal aliens can be reduced over time by enthusiastic enforcement of existing laws coupled with verifiable, secure and tamper-proof worker verification ID's for all applicants for U.S. jobs coupled with vigorous workplace and border enforcement.
The so-called "triggers" in the draft Senate bill are a joke. Border security will again be relegated to a false promise while amnesty for millions goes forward. Congress should postpone any new guest worker legislation until border security is an accomplished fact, not just another broken promise"

Posted by: Jim at May 21, 2007 2:42 PM

***************************

AMEN!!!

And the Hispanic Citizens of the United States of America in my area thoroughly agree, too!

Posted by Cat | May 22, 2007 12:10 AM

Captain Courageous, I am afraid that the "humanitarians" really are afraid they will lose the Hispanic vote when they have never had it and probably never will. Self-interest, I could see. Misguided self-interest is like a heat-seeking missile that reads idiocy as body warmth and drops its load on the sender.

If we don't want to create a country like Mexico where corruption and poverty rule, we cannot reward unlawful acts. Isn't the solution rather simple? Apply the law against those who are here illegally and those who are abetting them - businesses and those families like the Romneys who glance out their windows and just don't see the frightened, non-English speaking people working on their house and lawn. Say to those who are here illegally, go back home, and if you want to return, get in the legal line. In the meantime, make INS private-sector professional so it fast-forwards Mark Steyn's application and sends the terrorist back home COD and allows in those Mexicans we think should come in with the stipulation that taxes will have to be paid, the laws will have to be obeyed.

For all our concerns about the people who are here, when will anything change in Mexico when our country is being used as a safety valve? What about trying to get their country straightened out by going back and attacking no-fire, no-hire laws, by attacking corruption and bribes, by attacking the monopolies? Yes, it sounds like mortal combat, but that is what people have done in other parts of the world for centuries, stood up for freedom and the rule of law even if they had to die for them, and even if they had nothing to eat while they did. When Mexicans begin to fight for the rule of law and a free market economy, we Americans would help them in every possible. A good start would be the President of the United States speaking to the President and people of Mexico like an equal rather than a patronizing padrone or a drinking buddy.In other words, speaking truthfully.

The subject is deep. I'll go back to contemplating the wisdom of my fellow commentators here. All the best, Cat
http://www.britsattheirbest.com/

Posted by poodlemom | May 22, 2007 12:21 AM

What ticks me off the most is to hear one supporter after another stating that there is no way to deport the
12+ million or so illegals already here.

When I was growing up and would whine "I can't do this", either my Mom or Dad (whoever was close enough to hear) would say "Karen, how do you know you can't do it unless you try"?

There hasn't been any demonstrable effort to deport illegals, or to change circumstances here that would makes residence here less desirable.

Once we ready a group for a return trip to Mexico, make a stop at our southern border and utilize that cheap labor to complete a solid wall!! Then send them back over that wall.

Posted by Brady R. | May 22, 2007 5:25 AM

"(McCain) feels that illegals should account for all of their violations of the law if they want to achieve a legal status in the US. "

It's obvious that Sen. McCain doesn't understand that being in this country illegally is a violation of US law.

Posted by Keemo | May 22, 2007 7:13 AM

McCain defends immigration bill fast track, then is surprised when told of the removal of the back taxes requirement! ... But I thought he knew "more about immigration than anybody" in the room where the bill was hammered out!. ... P.S.: Even if they now stick the "back taxes" provision back in to avoid throwing what McCain calls "fuel on the fire," that's not the point. The point is that Bush has repeatedly used the "back taxes" argument to sell his plan, yet he took it out--in other words, you can't trust him to do anything he's promised to do when it comes to burdening illegal immigrants.

The president is opposed — morally and emotionally repelled — by the idea of enforcing the border with Mexico. It's just uncompassionate, in his view, and nothing is going to change that ...

Kennedy, McCain, Graham, Clinton, Bush; what do they all have in common "their strings are being pulled by those other than the American people"

Posted by Gekkobear | May 22, 2007 11:56 AM

"He feels it addresses all of the party's key issues: it secures the borders, it provides triggers that keeps other aspects of normalization from coming into force before that, and it provides penalties for those illegal immigrants already in the country. He pointed out that a $5000 fine is not small potatoes for someone earning $15,000 a year."

Secures the borders, just like the 1986 bill did... well if it worked in 1986 we don't have a problem to solve now...

Keeps other aspects of normalization from coming into force before that, except these "triggers" are less than the fencing bill passed last year... and these triggers are from Congressional action, not real fencing, patrols, etc. going into effect. In other words, as fake as 1986.

It provides penalties for those illegal immigrants already in the country, except it seems they'll be allowed to waive any penalties for back taxes, and can have the $5000 waived if they cannot afford it.. so it isn't really real.

So all 3 are fake, for a bill that was going to fix the problem in 1986 last time we did it (or 1965 befiore that). It isn't comparably different from these previous bills, and doesn't actually guarantee any border security (much like the previous bills)...

Why won't Republicans trust Congress to secure the borders later?

I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today. - Wimpy