Romney did go after McCain

I missed a part of the debate in which Romney was on the offensive. Hugh Hewitt writes:

The first half of the debate was Romney’s on points. Romney began by listing the series of assaults on conservative values championed by McCain including McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, the McCain-Lieberman global warming regulatory monster, the opposition to exploration in ANWR and the votes against the Bush tax cuts. McCain’s responses are the same we have heard again and again, and they do not wear well.

Here’s the section of the debate Hewitt is talking about:

JANET HOOK, LOS ANGELES TIMES: Governor Romney, you’ve spent the last several days warning voters that John McCain as president would follow, quote, “a liberal, Democratic course.” But, by most measures, doesn’t he have a pretty mainstream conservative record?

ROMNEY: I’m sure on many issues he does, and he’s a good Republican. I wouldn’t question those credentials at all. But there are a number of pieces of legislation where his views are out of the mainstream, at least in my view, of conservative Republican thought.

So, for instance, he’s opposed to drilling in ANWR, I believe. If I’m correct—correct me, Senator. He voted twice against the Bush tax cuts. Only two Republicans did that.

He is a co-author of McCain-Feingold, which I think took a whack at the First Amendment and I do believe, as well, hurt our party pretty significantly. And I think it’s made money have an even greater influence in politics today, not less influence.

He also was one of the co-authors of McCain-Kennedy, the first bill, by the way, not that bad. About 5 percent or 10 percent of the people, by our calculation, got a form of amnesty. Most people went home.

Under the final version of McCain-Kennedy, everybody who was here illegally, other than those who committed crimes, was eligible to receive a Z-visa. For $3,000, they got to stay here for the rest of their life. That’s not a Republican thought.

And then now McCain-Lieberman, which is a unilateral—meaning U.S.-only imposed—cap-and-trade program, which puts a burden, as much as 50 cents a gallon, on gasoline in this country. It basically says Americans are going to pay for the cost of global warming, not the Chinese and Indians and forth.

So those views are outside the mainstream of Republican conservative thought. And I guess I’d also note that, if you get endorsed by the New York Times, you’re probably not a conservative.

This is ok. But on McCain Kennedy, Romney need to say much more about how unbelievably terrible this bill was. Just mentioning the bare bones of amnesty is not enough. And he needs to talk about McCain’s fanaticism in pushing the bill, and the fact that he has not changed his position at all. He needs to drive the point home again and again, so that everyone watching will have no doubt about where McCain is coming from on this.

Also, Romney’s introduction to these remarks was too soft. To say, almost apologetically,

“…he’s a good Republican. I wouldn’t question those credentials at all. But there are a number of pieces of legislation where his views are out of the mainstream, at least in my view, of conservative Republican thought…” [Italics added]

sounds weak. Romney needs to say that on many key issues, McCain is not only on the side of liberals, but is leading the liberal charge against conservatives (as former Senator Rick Santorum said the other week), and we can fully anticipate that he would pursue the same course as president. And therefore McCain’s repeated ad nauseam claim to be a “proud conservative” is untrue. “You may be proud, Senator, but you’re no conservative. Time after time, when it really matters, you’re a proud anti-conservative.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 31, 2008 01:03 PM | Send