That immigration “reform” titan Tom Tancredo surprisingly endorsed Mitt Romney (and inadvertently betrayed the Conservative movement in doing so) as he dropped out. Many people had him pegged as endorsing Fred Thompson. As I recall border security guru Mark Kirkorian endorsed Fred Thompson’s immigration policy “white papers”. I have no idea why although I suspect Bay Buchanan has something to do with it.

Naturally this could be an innoculation against constant charges by right-wing activists that he is an “immigration squish”, or as Jim Geraghty put forth in a hypothetical quote: “How much of an immigration squish can I be, I was endorsed by Tancredo!”

I’m not certain it will actually move all of Tancredo’s followers. Not that Tancredo’s followers are much of a swing vote statistically but the word of (the) Tanc is practically a street credential and a very practical testimonial regarding an individual’s purity of intention/motivation.

That does not actually mean that Mitt Romney is really not an “immigration squish” or that his proposed, purported, notional, or hypothetical policy ideas are pure, good, right-headed, or Conservative.’s headline for this story should put various doubts into light: Romney Would Allow Illegals to Stay for Unspecified Time. It’s natural to question Mitt Romney’s consistency on policy, especially between claims, history, and present day reality. For someone who claims that he is against amnesty and sanctuaries, is he really?

I think I want to pick through this article again when I have more time.