Update and correction! What is the deal here?—all of a sudden today (after I posted this) NumbersUSA changed Santorum’s grade from a D to an A- (It was a D for the last many months)!!! So now what are Roy Beck and Kris Kobach going to do—pull their endorsement of Romney?
On Thursday I picked up the Washington Times on the news stand (can’t find it around Washington County often, but I was traveling through Frederick Co.) and especially noted the front page (top of the fold) story about Romney getting the endorsement of Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach. That is a big deal.
Kobach, as you may know, is a top notch lawyer on immigration law and is credited with drafting the “Arizona Law” that Obama’s Justice Department is trying to halt through legal challenges.
Longtime readers may recall Kobach came to Frederick County last May and spoke to an audience of about 200 on the programs local communities can legally do to begin to control immigration—287g, E-verify, and Secure Communities.
So here is what the Washington Times reported Thursday (emphasis mine):
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Mitt Romney collected the endorsements Wednesday of the architect of Arizona’s immigration-crackdown law, marking the final step on a journey that has taken him from lukewarm support of legalization to the Republican presidential field’s most ardent opponent of amnesty.
And with Mr. Romney inching closer to wrapping up the GOP’s nomination, it sets up what would be the strongest contrast ever between the two major parties’ candidates on immigration.
“Romney stands head and shoulders above the crowd,” Kris W. Kobach, Kansas’ secretary of state and the architect of the Arizona law, told The Washington Times, praising Mr. Romney for treading where other Republican candidates have refused to go. “Immigration is one of those issues that will appear to be a hot button — some elected officials who are afraid of offending anyone will avoid taking tough stands on immigration, and he took a tough stand.”
Mr. Kobach’s endorsement follows those of other leaders in the immigration crackdown movement, including Bay Buchanan, who ran Tom Tancredo’s presidential campaign in 2008 and who is the sister of former presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan.
The Obama Administration (Holder/Perez) has sued the state of South Carolina over its tough immigration control law:
It’s no surprise that the issue is popping up with 10 days to go before Republicans vote in South Carolina’s primary. South Carolina has passed its own Arizona-style law seeking to make illegal immigration a crime, giving state and local authorities police powers, and Republican primary voters in the state are overwhelmingly in favor of it.
The Obama administration has sued to halt the South Carolina and Arizona laws, as well as similar laws in Utah and Alabama, and those cases are winding their way through federal courts.
Romney has had a conversion of sorts on the issue we are told:
Mr. Sharry [open borders advocate] said Mr. Romney has changed on this issue. Before his first presidential campaign, he complimented President George W. Bush’s legalization plans and praised Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who led the Senate fight for legalization.
But by the end of his time as governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Romney had vetoed a bill offering in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants [for Marylanders that does tell us something--ed] and signed an agreement with federal authorities that would have allowed state and local police to assist in immigration enforcement. In the 2008 campaign, he ran ads in Iowa attacking Mr. McCain on immigration.
According to Roy Beck at NumbersUSA, Romney says all the right things now. He gets a ‘C’ grade in Numbers’ grading system. Not a great score, but better than his primary opponents (until this morning AFTER I posted this, see update above).
“He has held the line 100 percent on this amnesty stuff,” said Roy Beck, executive director of NumbersUSA, which grades the candidates on the issue.
Read it all. I can only assume the immigration control activists have come out this week because they have bought the line that only Romney can beat Obama AND they are attempting to lock Romney into a position on immigration.
Michael Savage would beg to differ on Romney
Gauging the mood of the Republican grassroots, Michael Savage says that none of the Republicans are strong on immigration, but says whichever one does take a hard stand will win the nomination.
From World Net Daily:
Pointing to the Obama administration’s announcement yesterday of a de facto amnesty for hundreds of thousands of El Salvador nationals living illegally in the U.S., talk-radio host Michael Savage wondered aloud why the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination and the moderators of more than a dozen debates have virtually ignored the issue of illegal immigration. [See my post on the Salvadoran amnesty--ed]
“This is a primary issue in the United States of America, and none of them will talk about it,” Savage told his “Savage Nation” listeners last night.
“How can I get excited about an election … when there are certain topics of immense importance to the American people that are verboten?” he asked.
In early debates immigration was discussed (surprising many of us); and readers (and Savage) should know that George Bush also gave this de facto amnesty to the Salvadorans.
Then here is the line that really caught my eye in the Savage article. Seems that if Romney has had a conversion of sorts it is only in the last 13 months:
Savage recalled a dinner he had in December 2010 with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who won the New Hampshire primary last night after a narrow victory in Iowa.
Savage asked Romney why he didn’t strongly address the illegal alien problem. Romney acknowledged the problem but essentially said that no matter how you approach it, you’ll be labeled a racist.
Bok! Bok! Bok! (click here).