I’ll explain the difference again, David, as it has been discussed before.

I came to Romney later than others because of some of his changed positions. He doesn’t deny he was pro-abortion. He doesn’t deny a number of positions he took while running for governor and governing, which he has modified or changed wholesale. But there is a difference. You write:

“Mark (Levin): I can understand (although I do not agree with) the position that the tax cuts were a bad idea at the time, but that they cannot be repealed without a devastating impact on the economy. That’s not inconsistent. I can also understand the position McCain has taken on immigration — namely, that he still wants a guest worker program like he always did, but he wants to work for one after he convinces Americans that he’s serious about border security.” But this isn’t the position McCain is taking.

McCain denies he ever opposed Bush’s tax cuts on class warfare grounds, which is demonstrably false. Why does he deny it, David? He used the argument all over the media. The record is clear. Yes, repealing them would have a devastating impact, as would instituting McCain-Lieberman or a host of other liberal ideas that McCain has not renounced. McCain has problems with “managing for profit” and believes the oil companies are evil, and so forth. I take his record in context and see either a hostility to free enterprise and private property, or ignorance about economic matters. And, he still hasn’t said his votes against the tax cuts were wrong.

McCain now claims he didn’t know the intensity of opposition by the American people to his amnesty bill, as he only now realizes border security should come first. That’s a serious point? And even now, he won’t flatly state, when asked, that he would not sign McCain-Kennedy if it hit his desk as president. Why not? Could it be because he would sign such a bill if it hit his desk?

We are watching the same race and coming to different conclusions. I actually should have been more precise in my earlier post. It would have been a fairer criticism to say, “Mark, McCain really hasn’t changed his positions. He just wants people to believe his positions weren’t what they were originally, or that he really hasn’t changed but needs to send the right signals to the talk-radio mafia.”

By the way, is NRO still endorsing Romney for the Republican nomination? And are the reasons for the endorsement still valid?