By Jennifer Parker

Jun 24, 2008 12:04pm

More Grief for McCain on Secret Meeting with Hispanics

ABC News’ Z. Byron Wolf Reports from Capitol Hill: Sen. John McCain took some grief from the Left for keeping a tight handle on who he invited to his secret meeting with Hispanics in Chicago last week. And he took some grief from the Right for apparently promising at that meeting to pursue a pathway to citizenship for some illegal immigrants.

The grief from the Right continued today. Anti-amnesty crusader Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., wrote McCain a letter calling him out on the meeting, questioning McCain’s commitment to pledges made earlier in the campaign, and snarkily invoking McCain’s "Straight Talk" mantra.

Tancredo asks if promises made by McCain earlier in the presidential campaign to hold off on giving longtime illegal immigrants a "pathway to citizenship" until after the borders were secured were any more than lip service, and wonders whether the presumptive Republican nominee’s candidacy is a Trojan horse for amnesty.

"Senator, given your past sponsorship of amnesty legislation, such statements raise troubling questions.  Are you planning to break a promise you made in February to postpone all other immigration reform legislation until we have first secured our borders?" writes Tancredo, who goes on to ask McCain to use an upcoming speech to the pro-pathway to citizenship National Council of La Raza in San Diego to embrace a "security first" immigration approach.

"I challenge you to deliver a message to that assembly which does not pander to their amnesty agenda. You should speak to the La Raza convention and to all Hispanic audiences about America’s need for secure borders as a priority above all other immigration reforms," Tancredo said.

McCain was a vocal proponent of the failed Senate attempt to pass comprehensive immigration reform when Republicans controlled the body in 2006. He was a less visible proponent in 2007, when Democrats were in charge, though he voted again for a bipartisan, comprehensive approach to immigration in both years.

The second attempt at immigration reform failed as his presidential campaign was ramping up. McCain explained to Republican voters in debates that he had gotten "the message" and would work to secure American borders before pursuing a pathway to citizenship.

"Giving Americans "Straight Talk" –- telling them what they need to hear instead of what they want to hear – demonstrates leadership, and as you have correctly pointed out many times in the past, that is what America needs now more than ever," he said.

User Comments

McCain has flipped on sooooooo many issues. I don’t even know where he stands any more.

Posted by: doubletalkexpress | June 24, 2008, 12:26 pm 12:26 pm

McCain is so confused he needs “OnStar” to tell him what to say. Please…get real here. Is anyone REALLY going to vote for him…?

Posted by: truthtell | June 24, 2008, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm

Does McCain constantly Flip Flop or does he simply forget what he has said the day before?

Posted by: Jim | June 24, 2008, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm

. . . .and in closing, let me remind all of you . . .that I have more experience in flip-flopping, than my opponent!

Posted by: DAVID NH | June 24, 2008, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm

Rove killed McCain in 2000 with the black baby rumor. All that’s left is a zombie who adopts whatever positions he feels he needs adopt to shore up his base and pick off some independents (e.g. new position supporting Bush tax cuts to super rich despite deficits).
Those who intend to vote for McCain should do so only after admitting to themselves that he is not the straight talking maverick he used to be. That way, they will not be surprised in the event McCain becomes President and governs as McBush rather than magically jettisoning all of his newly adopted right wing neocon positions and run the country like the McCain of 2000 would have done had henot been Roved in SC and forced out of the race.

Posted by: ToastOnDayOne | June 24, 2008, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm

Well according to the straight talker “there will be other wars”. All the best. Mr Black was not pulled up for what he said, it was because he said it.

Posted by: hmmmm | June 24, 2008, 1:39 pm 1:39 pm

Both Candidates are egregiously out of step with America’s Citizens on addressing illegal immigration. Overwhelmingly, American’s support securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws. With both parties pandering wildly for the pro-illegal and cheap labor votes, and given Congress abysmal approval ratings, voters can work to marginalize the threat both candidates pose by identifying and voting for pro-enforcement House and Senate Candidates. If there are no pro-enforcement candidates in your district, then work to unseat the incumbent, regardless of which party they belong to. Any shift in power will put both the White House and Congress on notice that America’s Citizens are taking the issue of illegal immigration seriously.

Posted by: Ed Weirdness | June 24, 2008, 2:03 pm 2:03 pm

That’s not change we can believe in!!!!

Posted by: GTFOOH | June 24, 2008, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm

Secret meeting with hispanics? What a bunch of CNN crap. Hispanic voting blocks don’t need to hide from anybody. We are an organize force and for the first time in history we will decide the presidential elections. All candidates need to listen to our agenda, no longer will we put up with CNN lies. You can’t accept this fact. The hell with you.

Posted by: Jose Missenelli | June 24, 2008, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm

C’mon let’s all get out the vote for Juan McCain! Anybody going to Mexico and can habla espanol? Stuff them in the car and bring them and their familes back for big Juan. He’s gonna need all the help he can get!

Posted by: pity | June 24, 2008, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm

To ABCNEWS staff:
The meeting wasn’t secret.
It was reported in the chicago papers for days before the meeting took place.
Why do you left wing media types have to lie all the time.
Obama meets behind closed doors with african american leaders and you don’t report that.
The person who is so angry about this is someone looking for publicity. This lady has made horrible anti catholic remarks.

Posted by: David | June 24, 2008, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm

Both parties and candidates needs to stand up and say “STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM ENTERING OUR COUNTRY AND SEND ILLEGAL IMMIAGRANTS BACK HOME.”
The laws are aleeady on the books. Just enforce them.

Posted by: Mary | June 24, 2008, 2:23 pm 2:23 pm

PLease don’t call him a flip flopper, it’s unfair to fish left out of water…His name is:
Juan McShamnesty and he’s a pander-bear. Juan McShamnesty long ago sold his soul to his masters in Mexico City and needs to please his masters by keeping the drugs flowing from Mexican cartels to the children in the US.
Due to global warming caused by all the hot air the disgorged daily the pander bears are now seeing their environment destryoed by over population from drunkards and rapists Mexico and high taxes from their many other betrayals.

Posted by: SPQR_US | June 24, 2008, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm

Both candidates know that without new immigration this country cannot survive and no matter what anybody thinks amnesty will be granted to all these outstanding citizens to be. There are too many lazy Americans that don’t want to work.

Posted by: jose missenelli | June 24, 2008, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm

Both presumptive Senator Obama, McCain and then House Speaker Pelosi have a lot to answer for, regarding to illegal immigration.. Their idea of Comprehensive Amnesty last March would have helped to bankrupt the country. Because what illegal aliens cannot get in benefits now, such as free health care, education and a host of benefits from both federal and state programs, they would have inherited after getting legal status. Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter are not like the political party members above, as they want the borders fence built according to the original plan and certainly no path to instant citizenship. Tancredo would eradicate the misinterpreted birthright law and stop all free welfare benefits to illegal foreign nationals.
Even as I speak the House Appropriations Committee today (today) will be deciding how the federal government enforces immigration laws. 202-224-3121 We must demand the border fence constructed according to Duncan Hunters ‘Secure border fence act (2008), reluctant Democrats must endorse the Federal SAVE ACT (4088) We must insist on full funding for (ICE) and no gutting of any programs. NUMBERS.

Posted by: Brittanicus | June 24, 2008, 3:58 pm 3:58 pm

The establishment media created the phony image of McCain as a “straight talking maverick”.
Now that McCain is no longer a useful dupe for the media’s agenda, the media is throwing him overboard.
Well, that’s the first thing they’ve done regarding McCain that I can be enthusiastic about.
The Republican Party could have nominated a candidate for President who would restore its adherence to its principles that have been torn all to shreds by Bush and now by McBush.
No matter who wins in November, the Republicans have lost by default.
In fact, the best thing for Republicans is for Obama to win.
Who knows, Obama may even do some good things, because I don’t think his brain is so fossilized like McCain’s.
Our country could completely collapse, and McCain will stick to his destructive agenda, because he is incapable of adapting to the real world, except when it comes to making a few phony promises, not ones to reneg on if and when he gets elected, but to reneg on a few days later on the campaign trail.
Democrats and Republicans agree: McCain needs to lose in November.

Posted by: lance sjogren | June 24, 2008, 4:00 pm 4:00 pm

Interesting that the Left is complaining about McCain keeping tight control over who attended the Hispanic meeting.
I guess maybe he wouldn’t invite the aztlan.net folks, the ones who openly call for genocide in America?
But his control obviously wasn’t too good, because he inadvertently let Rosana Pulido in, the articulate Latino Minuteman activist.
McCain clearly fell short in making sure that only Leftists got invited.

Posted by: lance sjogren | June 24, 2008, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm

I for one will never vote for Amnesty! We did that before, we should never do amnesty again, I don’t care what the situtation, this is why our Government does not take the American citizens seriously. Well I think they had better know, we will continue to say not to amnesty! We have already spoken twice and said out and out noooooooo amnesty! GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Posted by: Nezzie | June 24, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm

By the way: Great word there “snarkily”.
No doubt many people feel Tom Tancredo is a “snarky” guy.
As far as I’m concerned, when a politician sets himself up as some sort of paragon of morality, he had better be able to live up to that standard.
“Straight talking” McCain certainly has not.
Politicians always get these sanctimonious slogans thrown back in their faces.
Remember “family values”, wasn’t it Dan Quayle who talked about those? Then the Democrats, appropriately, presented their expansion of social programs as the advancement of “family values”.
Politicians never learn, especially the sanctimonious ones.

Posted by: lance sjogren | June 24, 2008, 4:08 pm 4:08 pm

Nezzie:
Since you will never vote for amnesty, I assume that means you will not vote for Juan Amnesty McCain?

Posted by: lance sjogren | June 24, 2008, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm

If you want amnesty for illegal aliens, vote for McCain.
If McCain wins, it will be people like him, Lindsey Grahamnesty, and Mel Martinez, that will be running the Republican Party.
If Obama wins, the real Republicans will take back their party from the interlopers who have hijacked it.
Then you will have a REAL 2 party system.
The Democrats will have the Presidency and Congress, so they will win on a lot of the issues. But at least you will have an actual opposition party, not the bad circus act we’ve seen under people like Bush and McBush.

Posted by: lance sjogren | June 24, 2008, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

Lance, right now I won’t be voting for anyone who will give a path to citizenship to illegal immigrants. If I have to I will vote for Bob Barr, as I am an Independent, I can give my vote to whomever I please. One thing I will do,however, is vote! I would like to see McAmnesty and Baramnesty pander to me for a change. Tell me, ask not what I can do for my country, ask what can my country do for me for a change?

Posted by: Nezzie | June 24, 2008, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm

We need a Third Party that is as powerful
as the usual two parties!
We need a voice for the American people.
We need to vote for these Third Party candidates in order to save America.

Posted by: Shazam | June 24, 2008, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm

High gas prices are on the minds of most legal residents, which also adversely impact Hispanic Americans. Senators Obama and McCain, who are pushing for amnesty and U.S. citizenship for at least12 million illegal immigrants, should be warned that if legalized and naturalized, those 12 million foreign-born individuals can possibly add within 20 years 120 million U.S. and foreign-born relatives to the U.S. Newcomers will use energy, in addition to needing jobs, health care, education and other social services that any taxes most will pay will not cover due to their low incomes!
As all causes are lost causes unless we also stop the population growth, all presidential candidates should take serious steps to curb U.S. population growth by substantially reducing immigration and teen pregnancies across the Board.
Americans want real solutions and courageous leaders.
Yeh Ling-Ling
Oakland, CA

Posted by: Yeh Ling-Ling | June 24, 2008, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm

Yes, McCain wants to give everyone of these people who broke the law a free pass. I will not vote for him for that reason. Obama wants to give everyone of these people who broke the law a free pass. I will not vote for him for that reason AND others. I guess I can sit at home on my couch come November.

Posted by: Sharon | June 24, 2008, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm

Both candidates are hiding on the immigration issue because they want to con the 50% of hispanics who favor preferential immigration policies for their race to voting for them.
68% of Americans have consistently said no amnesty, they want a sealed border and tough enforcement, and all illegals out. Period.
Both both Obama and McCain are pro dishonest business who want cheap labor, and guess who is paying for their campaigns.
So both candidates are lying to hispancis and other Americans on this topic..
PS. We do not need illegal aliens… they a huge net drain on our economy. What we need is the best and the brightest, people who have some morals and integrity.. ie they obey the law. We do not need barely literate peasants who select which laws they want to follow, and who we have to subsidize for 3 generations.

Posted by: Bettybb | June 24, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

It is time to kick all three candidates to the curb and vote for
Chuck Baldwin
http://www.constitutionparty.com
http://www.baldwin2008.com
If I Were President
By chuck | May 26, 2008
Quote
Due to my frequent criticisms of President George W. Bush, I am often asked what I would do if I were President of these United States. This column will serve as an attempt to answer that question.
If I were President, I would begin the process of safely extracting our troops from Iraq. In the first place, our troops are no longer fighting a war, they are an occupation force, which occupies a sovereign country. And this is being done without a Declaration of War. The Iraqi people resent our occupation as much as we would resent another nation stronger than ours invading and occupying America. If such a thing happened to our beloved country, I’m sure many of us would also become “insurgents.”
In the second place, the invasion and occupation of Iraq was absolutely unnecessary. Instead of sacrificing more than 4,000 American lives and the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens (not to mention some 2-3 trillion dollars), President Bush should have supported Ron Paul’s bill, H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001. This is the constitutional way to deal with rogue terrorist organizations. This is the way President Thomas Jefferson responded to the Barbary pirates.
According to Congressman Paul, “A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the President the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage aggression against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation.”
Had President Bush responded in this manner, tens of thousands of lives would have been saved, trillions of dollars would not have needed to be spent, Osama bin Laden and most of his fellow terrorists would likely be dead, and we would not be bogged down in a nightmarish military quagmire in Iraq. And, if I were President, this is exactly how I would handle terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda.
Furthermore, it is absolutely ludicrous to say we are fighting a war on terror half way around the world when we refuse to secure our borders and ports. If I were President, I would immediately seal our borders. I would also see to it that employers in America who knowingly hire illegal aliens are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. In plain language: any employer who consciously hires illegal aliens would go to jail. They would not pass Go; they would not collect $200; they would go straight to jail.
By sealing the borders and by cutting off the money supply to illegal aliens, the problem of illegal immigration would dry up. As it is, we have no idea how many potential terrorists–not to mention violent gang members such as MS-13–have snuck (and are sneaking) through our borders.
And speaking of illegal immigration, as President, I would enforce our visa rules. This means anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law is immediately deported. There would be no “path to citizenship” given to any illegal alien. That means no amnesty. Not in any shape, manner, or form. I would not allow tax dollars to be used to pay for illegal aliens’ education, social services, or medical care. As President, I would end birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. There would be no “anchor babies” during my administration.
If I were President, I would use the bully pulpit of the White House to encourage Congress to pass Congressman Ron Paul’s Sanctity of Life Act. In short, this bill would do two things: First, it would declare that unborn babies are persons under the law. Second, under the authority of Article. III. Section. 2. of the U.S. Constitution, it would remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the Court. In essence, this bill would immediately overturn Roe v. Wade and end legalized abortion.
Republicans tout themselves as being “pro-life.” Yet, the GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House for six years and did absolutely nothing to overturn Roe or end abortion-on-demand. Under my administration, we could end legal abortion in a matter of days, not decades. And if Congress refused to pass Dr. Paul’s bill, I would use the constitutional power of the Presidency to deny funds to protect abortion clinics. Either way, legalized abortion ends when I take office.
On the subject of foreign policy, as President, I would end foreign aid. I would also end the current infatuation with nation-building, empire-building, and interventionism. America is not the world’s policeman. Neither are our military personnel the personal militia of the United Nations.
Remember that President Bush told the U.N. in 2003 that the reason we invaded Iraq was for the purpose of securing the “peace and credibility of the United Nations.” (I lie not; that is what he said.) President Bush also placed the U.S. back under UNESCO in spite of the fact that President Reagan had heroically taken the U.S. out from under that sinister organization.
I am sure that readers recall that the U.N. Charter was authored by a Soviet communist agent (Alger Hiss) and that the U.S. has been fighting wars for the U.N. ever since the organization was created back in 1945.
Speaking of the United Nations, as President, I would withhold funds from the support of the United Nations. In other words, I would get the U.S. out of the U.N. Beyond that, when I move into the White House, the U.N.’s rent is up! They move out of New York City post haste.
By the same token, there is absolutely no reason for us to be in NATO. We should not be antagonizing Russia by attempting to expand NATO. There is no reason why Russia could not become a friend and ally of the United States. Free and fair trade with Russia and a noninterventionist foreign policy in Europe would do much to endear American interests to Russia. To insist on expanding and empowering NATO only serves to further alienate Russia and drive her to make alliances with Communist China.
Speaking of China, it is time that we recognize the very serious threat that China poses to the peace and security of the United States. Our trade practices serve only to allow corporate America to continue to invest in what will surely become an albatross around the neck of our well-being. We must discontinue the practice of allowing China to export its cheap products to the U.S. with no protection for America’s jobs and manufacturing, not to mention the lack of protection for our safety. This must stop, and it will stop when I become President. “Free trade” will no longer mean a free ride for Red China.
Furthermore, as President, I would take the preservation of our nation’s sovereignty and independence extremely seriously. This means that the burgeoning North American Union is dead on arrival the day I am sworn in as President. Gone, too, is the NAFTA superhighway. And for that matter, I would lead the United States out of NAFTA and CAFTA altogether. And any prospect for the FTAA would be dead as well.
As President, I would be the best friend that gun owners (and lawful gun dealers), homeschoolers, and veterans ever had in the White House. These are three of the most persecuted, harassed, or overlooked groups of people in the country. But not if I were President.
There is no reason why our veterans should wait for weeks and months to receive the medical care they need. It is disgraceful that we would ask our brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces to fight our country’s battles and then leave them to pretty much fend for themselves when it comes to receiving adequate health care. I would make taking care of our veterans an extremely high priority, if I were President.
If I were President, I would also do everything in my power to locate and retrieve any and all MIAs. I personally believe that there are hundreds of our servicemen who are yet being held against their will in various parts of the world. I would make finding them and bringing them home of utmost priority, if I were President.
On the home front, if I were President, I would end corporate welfare. I would also work to disband the Department of Energy (along with the Department of Education and many other federal departments). There is absolutely no reason for us to be dependent upon OPEC. There is enough gas and oil under the soil of Alaska (not to mention the Dakotas and the Gulf of Mexico) to meet the energy needs of the United States for the next 150-200 years. There is also no reason that gas should cost more than $1.50 a gallon (which is about what it was before Bush became President).
We must begin drilling for the domestic oil that we know exists; we must build more refineries and nuclear power plants. There is no reason why the United States cannot be mostly energy independent. It is time we started putting the people and interests of the United States ahead of the CEOs and interests of international corporations.
Lastly, if I were President, I would work feverishly to overturn the Sixteenth Amendment, which would repeal the Income Tax. And, no, I would not promote a national sales tax. That would be disastrous! Can you imagine what a 30% sales tax would do to the cost of EVERYTHING? Plus, give politicians a national sales tax to increase and just imagine what kind of percent that would grow into!
I would also work to repeal the “death tax,” inheritance taxes, and property taxes. The American people are already paying somewhere between 30% and 40% of their income to Uncle Sam. It must stop. We are bankrupting our country with this incessant and burdensome tax system. In addition, I would work to expunge the Federal Reserve and to restore the American economy to sound money.
Now, I hear people say, That’s easy for you to say; you are not a candidate for President. Ah, but now I am.
Last week, in its national nominating convention in Kansas City, Missouri, the Constitution Party nominated me as its 2008 Presidential candidate. Party delegates nominated me over Ambassador Alan Keyes by a margin of 74% to 24%. Therefore, I am now a candidate for President of these United States.
See the CP website at http://www.constitutionparty.com
My Vice Presidential running mate is Darrell Castle, an attorney and Vietnam War Marine Corps veteran from Memphis, Tennessee.
Our web site is not online yet, but will be soon. We will be able to receive credit card donations when the web page is uploaded. The address of my campaign web site is: http://www.baldwin2008.com
In the meantime, if anyone wants to support our campaign, checks may be written to:
Baldwin 2008
P.O. Box 131
Palmyra, New Jersey 08065
I believe it is only fair, as I continue to write these columns, that one understands the full disclosure of my candidacy.
As readers know, I enthusiastically supported Ron Paul during the Republican Primary season. I plan to continue to trumpet his call for limited government, non-interventionism abroad, constitutional government, and freedom into the general election as a Third Party candidate.
I do not expect the national media to pay us much heed; they seldom do. I do not expect to receive large donations from corporate America. I do expect criticism and ridicule. That is nothing new. However, I also anticipate tens of thousands of freedom-loving people from all religious persuasions and walks of life to rally to our cause. Why? Because thousands of principled people will not be bullied into voting for the “evil of two lessers” being shoved down our throats by the two major parties. Because this campaign is not about Chuck Baldwin. It is not about a political party. It is about freedom. It is about constitutional government. It is about restoring America to the founding principles bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers. If you believe in those principles, join us!
In the meantime, these columns will continue to serve as a voice for America’s founding principles, as they have for the past eight-plus years. In addition, unlike the candidates from the two major parties, the taxpayers are not underwriting my campaign, and I will continue my day job. (Imagine that: a Presidential candidate who actually works for a living!) And all of this is just in time for my 56th birthday, which is tomorrow, May 3.
There you have it: this is what I would do if I were President of these wonderful United States of America.
UnQuote

Posted by: americangal4ever | June 24, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm

I was at this event and he said nothing about “pathway.” Sounds like Tancredo is still sore about getting killed in his bid for the nomination.

Posted by: Jcruz | June 25, 2008, 12:01 am 12:01 am

McCain and Obama share the same policy re: Latinos….Oh that’s right Obama wants to give thee illegal aliens Drivers Licenses and he attacked Clinton for implying it made sense.
If you want to attack McCain on this issue look at Obama’s record here…Oh that’s right he has no record…then look at his policy…oops

Posted by: Jackie | June 25, 2008, 12:14 am 12:14 am

Doubletalk Express. With Borat elected, the reps will block his agenda, if McVain wins, he will have the support of the Dems in both houses for his amnesty, a losing situation. He will legalize up to 38 million illegals, which will immediatly petition for all their relatives to join them, about another 120 million additional low skilled, low income peasants will flood the nation. By 2050, we will have 600 million in this country, double our present population. Mexifornia is out of water, we are rationing it. What will the extra 30 million residents here drink?

Posted by: Jimi | June 25, 2008, 11:56 am 11:56 am

Oops – made a mistake and changed parties from democratic because I have no representation to the Republican party – which is a farce. Tell ya what they want to hear and then stick it to them – just citizens, I mean of course.
So, I’m switching to Independent – only switched to Republican Party when I thought they were going to give us someone who wanted to stop the insane “let anyone who wants to come in – into the USA – forgettabout jobs Amnesty Bill”…………my mistake!
Revere

Posted by: Shirley Bradley | June 25, 2008, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.