Here's House Majority Leader Eric Cantor,
in February, trying to rebrand the Republican Party as being in favor of comprehensive immigration reform in the wake of Mitt "self deportation" Romney's presidential campaign:
"I really admire Sen. Rubio and the kinds of things he's standing for," Cantor said earlier on CBS This Morning. "I think he's moving in the right direction... We've got things that I believe need to be addressed, from border security to worker programs. We need to be addressing the situation where you've got some children in this country that are here because of actions of their parents and know no other place than America as home. I believe we've got to work in an expedited fashion to address them."
Cantor stopped short of giving comprehensive immigration reform his full endorsement, but his comments made it clear that he wanted Republicans to get a deal done. But now, just five months later, Cantor sounds like a man who has been defeated. Here he is Tuesday night on Fox, saying he opposes the deal brokered by Rubio and will block a vote on it because it doesn't have the support of a majority of Republicans:
HANNITY: Would you insist that the Hastert rule apply to any bill that comes out of conference?
CANTOR: Yes, I absolutely would. I think the Speaker of the House has said the same that he would as well. That is not going to happen. As we proceed into the discussions about the immigration issues, there's one thing all of us agree on, I think for the most part, and that is, we don't support the Senate bill.
And why, despite the praise he lavished on Rubio just five months ago, does Cantor say he opposes the Senate bill? Because:
One of the most offensive parts of the bill is the actual border security piece.
So the guy who was talking about how we need to deal with comprehensive reform in February now says it's more important to stop people from coming into the country than it is to treat the 11 million immigrants who are already here like human beings. Of course, the Senate bill gives Cantor a bit of a problem since it does both things at the same time: It surges border security while also granting legal status and a path to citizenship for immigrants who are already here.
But Eric Cantor couldn't admit that the real reason Republican politicians are against a path to citizenship is that they think Latinos will always vote for Democrats, so he needed to come up with an argument to wiggle himself out of the jam. His solution? Simple: Blame Obamacare!
If the President can selectively enforce the provision under Obamacare, what's to say that he can't selectively enforce or not enforce the provision on border security and the immigration package?
If you believe that, then Republican opposition to immigration reform has nothing to do with being Latino. Instead, it's
because of Obamacare. Well, good luck making that argument stick. Seriously, if they were ever serious about rebranding, with this new spin they haven't just given up on rebranding, they've sprinted their way back to the same marketing campaign that gave them a branding problem in the first place.