Profound revelation about John McCain's immigration policy? Or did we all just refuse to see it?

I promised I'd write more on John Hawkins' pronouncement on John McCain and his shifting immigration stances. And I say "shifting" only because his stance has been perceived as shifting. Personally, I now believe it never did. While there may have been some confusion as to the scheduling of McCain's agenda , the priorities have remained the same.

I share John's (and other's) distaste with McCain on the subject of immigration. It's McCain's single worst position among the conservative base, and rightly so. Anyone who saw the interviews and and watched the debates last year where the Maverick gave his pained definitions of amnesty knew then that he too was aware of that fact, and carefully tiptoeing through his answers. McCain has carefully played word games in the media with great success. And regrettably, too many folks so wanted to make lemonade from lemons that he largely went unchallenged on what has from the beginning been about amnesty and never changed.

In this, I do fault Senator McCain. His semantic games have lacked the candor and bluntness that he likes to portray as his strengths. Here he is in September last year arguing that comprehensive immigration reform isn't amnesty (skip ahead to about 2:45):

I often wonder why McCain's definition of amnesty didn't sink his bid for the nomination as soon as he said it. It's a word that has multiple meanings, "forgiveness" is not even cited as a definition by most dictionaries. His willful misrepresentation of the context and definition of the word used by the citizens to whom he responded was a disturbing blast of arrogance and condescension that should have had more folks seeing flashing red lights and hearing klaxons. Sigh.

But back to the larger point - Senator McCain's position on immigration reform shifted little when he started proclaiming that he "got the message" from the border hawks. Indeed, all that changed was the schedule. Here he is on O'Reilly describing his vision of immigration reform:

Note how he combines the issues in his answer as "immigration reform". Other than the "security first" part, how is this different from his comprehensive immigration reform from last year?

Most of the punditry and the blogosphere (including yours truly) assumed that when McCain said "security first" he meant "separately". I'm going to suggest something to you all:

John McCain always intended to resurrect the previous bill in full, with the addition of some sort of timetable and milestone provisions regarding border security to pacify the border hawks.

Assuming that the suggestion above is correct, has John McCain lied about immigration? That's a toughie. Certainly he has through omission - his campaign speeches have been long on promise regarding immigration but short on the mechanics required to carry the promise out. In fairness, McCain may have originally assumed that everyone knew that his bill would come back with the addition of the security first provision. However, over time he surely should have been been aware that folks had the wrong interpretation, and he shouldn't have let let it go this far without clarifying his position.

But go back through everything he's said about immigration since last summer - can any of you find in his words something that refutes my suggestion above? I can't.

When a myth circulates that portrays a politician in a negative light, they're quick in the attempt to dispel it. But when a myth shows them in a positive light, there's a reluctance to do so. It's a quality not unique to John McCain. But this particular myth should have been exposed in the blogosphere, and it was not. Not to pick on John Hawkins, but he was taken in like the rest of us. From his commentary at Townhall.com:

Then there's immigration, where we know McCain is just dying to put the illegal immigrants in this country on a path to citizenship. However, he has pledged to secure the border before he does that. In all honesty, with the glacier-like speed that the federal government moves, there is zero chance that is going to be completed in the next four years. Yet, as security improves, more and more illegal aliens will leave the country on their own. So even though McCain's motives wouldn't be pure, enforcement by attrition would still occur during his first term and if conservatives hold McCain to his promise, it's very possible that he wouldn't be able to implement amnesty by 2012.

If you assumed that McCain would deal with amnesty in separate legislation only after the border is secured, this was a reasonable conclusion - the clock on McCain's presidency would run out long before he could enact amnesty. This was my hope as well. But McCain never said he would enact separate bills, he simply said the border would be secure first.

So based on recent statements, and reviewing past ones, what would immigration reform look like under John McCain?

It would be a comprehensive bill. Some sort of plan to secure the borders would likely be required to be accomplished first, followed by Z-visas and path to citizenship but only after certain metrics have been met. Even if the border takes more than four years to fix, we would be stuck with the enduring and destructive legacy of amnesty. No clock-watching will change it, and having already passed the larger bill, Congress will feel free to accelerate the more harmful parts without waiting for border certification. The danger here cannot be overstated. Once amnesty is the law, any pre-conditions can be altered quickly and easily.

Back to theme about McCain and whether his recent statements expose either lies or betrayals - have we been had? Yes, we have. But McCain doesn't deserve all the blame. The assumptions of how McCain's plan would manifest itself by the punditry and the blogosphere have been nearly universally flawed in spite of the fact that McCain himself never confirmed those assumptions. We hoped that he meant the issues would be dealt with separately, and didn't want to see that he could take other paths and still keep his promise.

Like it or don't, most of us on the right should be reserving some of the anger being displayed this week for ourselves.