Julia Preston reports in the New York Times:
While acknowledging that the recession makes the political battle more difficult, President Obama plans to begin addressing the country’s immigration system this year, including looking for a path for illegal immigrants to become legal, a senior administration official said on Wednesday.
Mr. Obama will frame the new effort — likely to rouse passions on all sides of the highly divisive issue — as “policy reform that controls immigration and makes it an orderly system,” said the official, Cecilia Muñoz, deputy assistant to the president and director of intergovernmental affairs in the White House.
Mr. Obama plans to speak publicly about the issue in May, administration officials said, and over the summer he will convene working groups, including lawmakers from both parties and a range of immigration groups, to begin discussing possible legislation for as early as this fall.
Some White House officials said that immigration would not take precedence over the health care and energy proposals that Mr. Obama has identified as priorities. But the timetable is consistent with pledges Mr. Obama made to Hispanic groups in last year’s campaign.
He said then that comprehensive immigration legislation, including a plan to make legal status possible for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, would be a priority in his first year in office. Latino voters turned out strongly for Mr. Obama in the election.
“He intends to start the debate this year,” Ms. Muñoz said. ...
Debate is still under way among administration officials about the precise timing and strategy. For example, it is unclear who will take up the Obama initiative in Congress....
The White House is calculating that public support for fixing the immigration system, which is widely acknowledged to be broken, will outweigh opposition from voters who argue that immigrants take jobs from Americans.
Best guess: Obama is counting on getting it passed by having his minions use the R word to smear opponents.
"Why do we need to wait a sixth year for a third hearing on whether the aunt of the most popular man in Kenya needs political asylum from Kenya?"
ReplyDeleteOuch! Sailer's blade cuts quick and deep.
- Fred
How is it politically stupid, Sailer? People against the bill won't vote for Obama in 2012 anyway. His elite and wealthier supporters won't object. Meanwhile, he'll greatly amplify his Democratic base while increasing the need for bigger government and social services. He'll also slow down the economic recovery just enough to buy him more time and occasion to realize the dreams of his father. It's actually a really smart and bold move.
ReplyDeleteI think you're stuck in the wrong century or something. Are you really so delusional as to think there's hope for America? The ship is sunk. It's all about power and spoils now.
"Margaret Wong"? Since when does a high-profile case depend on a Chinese attorney?
ReplyDeleteAs for the so-called "amnesty" passing, Joe Guzzardi claims it won't, and has been right for, what?, eight years now?
And even his argument doesn't include the obvious hurdle that no one talks about: to sign such a bill would stab his fellow blacks in the back big-time.
Commercial time on black radio is relatively cheap, isn't it?
this is such a colossally stupid idea given the economy and unemployment rates that the only possible explanation is that obama expects things to get worse - both in the economy and his loss of popularity - and wants to get everything started ASAP on his plan for permanent majority before americans wise up to how cluelessly left wing he really is...
ReplyDeletethat said, i don't think this will happen. not with the budget, healthcare, bailout, stimulus already at the trough. its too easy for wavering congressmen to say "enough".
i'm wagering that the $800bn stimulus was the high watermark of his ability to get his way... peaked within the first month... too early...
progress on the bank bailout eliminated obama's only trump card...which was witholding help for the economy's real problems...which was how the stimulus was railroaded.
This could be a head fake, but I doubt it. Without amnesty, the plan to finish off the historic American nation might not work. Obama figures that he has this one moment in time to push his most radical agenda. If he gets amnesty passed, then the time to push a radical agenda may never end, what with the support going forward of tens of millions of new poor and poorly educated “voters” and clients of the government.
ReplyDeleteIf Obama loses the immigration fight, he still can claim he went to bat for immigrants and can pin the tail on the elephant. Meanwhile, many voters opposed to amnesty will forget about it by 2012, especially if it hasn’t passed.
But my guess is that it will pass. Look for arguments like this: “we need the cheap labor in a down economy.” Yea, I know that sucks as an argument, but if you own the media you don’t need good arguments.
Best guess: Obama is counting on getting it passed by having his minions use the R word to smear opponents.
ReplyDeleteGood. He can use it everyday and often. People are starting not to care. They're catching on. Racist? It's a usless, meanningless label that should be put out of its misery.
The killer quote on the Aunt Zeituni story was from a government official who denied she was getting special treatment. 'We give everyone in these cases the same treatment,' said she. Probably true, and that's the real problem. By the time of her next hearing Aunt Zeituni will have been here at least 9 years illegally, 5-6 of them under order of deportation. The case ain't over until the alien wins.
I half wonder if Obama's bringing up amnesty to actually give Democrats cover. Introduce the bill, then have all but the very safest Dems vote against it. Then the Democrats in marginal districts get cred as have killed amnesty. If a strategy it's a risky one, but it's the sort of thing Rahm might propose.
Amnesty won't succeed. It WILL NOT succeed. The anger aroused by an amnesty proposal at a time of massive job losses would be red hot. The only justification for the 2006 & 2007 versions was that these people were doing jobs "Americans won't do." Obama comes into office, spends trillions of dollars we don't have, creates trillions of dollars worth of new welfare handouts, gives hundreds of billions to private companies, then opens the floodgates to more leeches? The streets will run with blood, if only figuratively.
And Fall would be the worst time to do it. It's far enough away from the conventions and primaries for opponents to rev up their campaigns but close enough to be fresh on the voters' minds.
Without amnesty, the plan to finish off the historic American nation might not work. Obama figures that he has this one moment in time to push his most radical agenda.
ReplyDeleteWhat the Democrats and RINOs are afraid of is that these people will eventually return home for lack of jobs, and the Mestizoization of America will slow. They need to keep them here.
The Bush administration forced Homeland Security to not deport Obama's aunt, so that it would not affect the election.
ReplyDeleteDrink that in for a second. A sitting "Republican" president, ostensibly on the side of enforcing the law, handed one of the greatest October surprises ever...decided to engage in *active* non enforcement to ensure that Obama would win.
If anyone ever needed proof that non-enforcement was *official policy* of the United States government...well...you don't get much higher up than the President.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090126/D95UPOM80.html
Gov't worried about media interest in Obama's aunt
Email this Story
Jan 26, 6:15 AM (ET)
By TED BRIDIS and EILEEN SULLIVAN
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Homeland Security Department still is requiring
high-level approval before federal immigration agents can arrest
fugitives, a rule quietly imposed by the Bush administration days
before the election of Barack Obama, whose aunt has been living in the
United States illegally.
The unusual directive from the Homeland Security Department came amid
concerns that such arrests might generate "negative media or
congressional interest," according to a newly disclosed federal
document obtained by The Associated Press.
The directive makes clear that U.S. officials worried about possible
election implications of arresting Zeituni Onyango, the half-sister of
Obama's late father, who at the time was living in public housing in
Boston. She is now believed to be living in Cleveland.
A copy of the directive, "Fugitive Case File Vetting Prior to Arrest,"
was released to the AP just over two months after it was requested
under the Freedom of Information Act. It does not mention President
Obama or any members of his extended family.
The directive is still in place, Immigration and Customs Enforcement
spokeswoman Kelly Nantel told the AP. It originally was distributed
Oct. 31 by e-mail to immigration officers by an assistant director at
the agency. Obama was elected president five days later. Nantel said
the directive called for close supervision over any cases that could
be high profile. She said it was not specific to Obama's relatives.
The White House said late Sunday that Obama "has not contacted any
government agency regarding Ms. Onyango's case, nor has any
representative of the president." It said Obama's administration
wasn't briefed on why the directive was issued by Immigration and
Customs Enforcement and will consider whether to overturn it.
"Like other rules and directives issued by the previous
administration, it will be reviewed and revoked if it does not serve
the best interests of the American people," the White House told the
AP.
It was unclear what effect, if any, the directive has had on
immigration enforcement across the country. Earlier this month 69
people were arrested during an Immigration and Customs Enforcement
sweep in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
Obama's aunt was instructed to leave the country four years ago by an
immigration judge who rejected her request for asylum from her native
Kenya. The East African nation has been fractured by violence in
recent years, including a period of two months of bloodshed after
December 2007 that killed 1,500 people.
Despite the deportation order, Onyango traveled to Washington last
week for her nephew's inauguration. News organizations observed her
attending an inaugural ball at Washington's Renaissance Mayflower
Hotel, a historic luxury hotel, with her immigration lawyer, Margaret
Wong.
The AP was first to disclose Onyango's illegal status Oct. 31, hours
after the Homeland Security directive was issued.
Obama has said he didn't know his aunt was living in the United States
illegally and believes that laws covering the situation should be
followed. The White House said late Sunday that Onyango's lawyer,
Margaret Wong, contacted Obama's lawyer to confirm Wong's role in the
case.
"They agreed at the time that the case should proceed in the ordinary
course, with neither the president nor his representatives having any
involvement," the White House said.
Onyango, 56, has said she intends to fight the deportation order and
hopes to remain in the United States. ICE has since said it is
investigating whether any laws or rules were broken in the disclosure
about Obama's aunt.
Mike Rogers, a spokesman for Onyango's immigration lawyer, said late
Friday that Onyango remains in the country and her case is proceeding
through the legal system. He did not know where in the U.S. she was or
what court was handling her case.
Rogers said he met Onyango once, in November, and described her as a
private, spiritual woman who remains strong despite legal, medical and
financial difficulties.
"She's had a hard life but is not feeling sorry for herself," Rogers
said. "She's strong for a woman who's been beaten up like she has by
life." Of Obama, he said: "She's very proud of her nephew."
The government's Oct. 31 directive was "effective immediately and
until further notice," and required that immigration agents obtain
approval from ICE field office directors or deputy directors before
arresting fugitives. An approval would depend on an internal review
that would consider, among other issues, "any potential for negative
media or congressional interest."
"A hold on any actions to proceed with arrest will be placed in the
case file until I can review the case and evaluate the impact of the
potential media or congressional interest," wrote the assistant field
operations director for immigrant detention and removal.
Nantel said there was never any direction that officials should not
take action on an enforcement issue. It clarified that potentially
high-profile cases needed to be coordinated with the agency's senior
officials.
The Homeland Security Department censored parts of the document before
turning it over to the AP, citing privacy and law enforcement reasons
for withholding some of the information, including the name of the
person who sent the e-mail. It also blacked out the names of
recipients of the directive, making it impossible to determine whether
it was sent to anyone outside the department or outside government.
Obama's campaign said in October it was returning $260 that Onyango
had contributed in small increments to Obama's presidential bid over
several months. Federal election law prohibits most foreigners from
making political donations. Onyango listed her employer as the Boston
Housing Authority and last gave $5 on Sept. 19.
Onyango is part of Obama's large paternal family, with many related to
him by blood whom he never knew growing up.
President Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., left the future
presidential nominee when the boy was 2, and they reunited only once -
for a monthlong visit when the president was 10. The elder Obama lived
most of his life in Kenya, where he fathered seven other children with
three other wives. He died in a car crash in 1982.
President Obama was raised for the most part by his mother and her
parents in Hawaii. He first met his father's side of the family when
he traveled to Africa 20 years ago. He referred to Onyango as "Auntie
Zeituni" when describing the trip in his memoir, saying she was "a
proud woman."
---
Associated Press writer JoAnne Viviano in Columbus, Ohio, contributed
to this story.
Guzzardi is just whistling past the graveyard.
ReplyDeleteAmnesty is a done deal.
Blacks won't EVER criticize Obama, and Obama does not care about Blacks merely getting "Whitey" which ought to be abundantly clear by now. In fact nearly ALL Black leaders SUPPORT Amnesty because it sticks it to Whitey, and holds out the hope of Whites being a discriminated against minority.
This idea is enormously popular among Blacks. And among White Elites who fear/hate middle/working class White competition.
The Media will cheerlead it, and it will be passed by WOMEN. Particularly White Women.
What Guzzardi does not get (because he's frankly clueless about politics and demographics, living in the era of 1991), is that most White women are SINGLE. They are also childless.
They could CARE LESS (for obvious demographic reasons) about White men being hurt by Illegal Immigration or Amnesty. Jobs lost in the firings were 82% MALE. Which means WHITE MEN.
Women support Amnesty because they too HATE the White Male working/middle class and want them a minority. Only Women with sons have an investment in the future, single women with no male kids = Amnesty passes, BIG TIME.
In a Recession. Or Depression.
Women will stick by Obama to the end. He can do whatever, women will always love the guy because he's "First Rockstar." For the first time in Census Bureau history, most women are now single (2007 results). TFR for White women is 1.7 or something. And dropping. Illegitimacy for White women according to the CDC is 28%.
Sure Congress people will take heat, but so what? They'll get tons of new Democratic voters, the Media will use the Racist tag word ad nauseum, and women will angrily denounce anyone who votes against it as a "Racist" as well who is unworthy of pretty much anything.
Obama's victory, pace Steve, was not due to Hispanic voting or Blacks or Asians suddenly being a much larger part of the population.
It was WOMEN, and specifically White Women, particularly single women but also to a degree married White women who gave Obama the Presidency.
Women solidly back Affirmative Action AND Amnesty. They'll push it hard and get it done. One giant Daddy State, with troublesome White guys who are non-Alpha pushed aside by "vibrant" Mexican immigrants, no downside ...
Who after all works in offices, hospitals, and schools? Day laborers from Chiapas? Please. Women don't face the same pressures as men do from Amnesty.
I'd love to be wrong. But I'm not. Women are the fountain of PC, and for cultural/control reasons as well as economic ones, they'll make Amnesty happen. Just as native European Women have pushed Immigration in Europe.
If BHO is serious about the Amnesty he is going to lose seats in the 2010 election by a record margin. Which is saying something because there have been some massive mudslides in response to wacky presidents.
ReplyDeleteBut, Steve, I think Obama is just keeping up appearances with La Raza. I think the Whitehouse knows that "by next fall" the economy is going to much worse and Obama will have an easy excuse for a long postponement on this issue.
The US economy is going to completely implode over the next two years. Read Denninger, Schiff, Shedlock, Roubini, Faber. This thing is going down in a heap like a badly wounded elephant.
While Numbers USA, Vdare etc need to continue to fight hard against Amnesty, I don't get the impression that Obama has anything like McCain's fanatical, visceral devotion to it. For one thing, Hispanicastion of the USA is opposed to Obama's Black Nationalist ethos, and while he may see both as anti-White and thus good things, there is a degree of cognitive dissidence.
ReplyDeleteThis was the plan all along. An influx of left leaning voters MUST be secured for the upcoming redistricting. That will be the final nail in our coffin.
ReplyDeleteI hope everyone is prepared for the upcoming retroactive dislike-laws to go into effect.
"12 million"
ReplyDeleteThat figure has been kickin' around for years. The Bear Stearns report setting the figure at 20 million is at least 5 years old.
We all know that as soon as an amnesty - or whatever they call it next - is proposed, there will be a mad rush across the border by millions hoping to get in on the deal.
In 1986, we were told that there were a million illegal aliens that would be granted amnesty. Final total was near 3 million. Of course, this doesn't relect their US-born children or the families, both immediate and extended, that they brought in afterwards.
If this amnesty does pass this year, my guess is that within 10 years the amnesty itself will have covered no fewer than 30 million, not counting family reunification.
Best guess: Obama is counting on getting it passed by having his minions use the R word to smear opponents.
ReplyDeleteNot only will that be the tactic, it'll be the strategy:
Mr. Obama will frame the new effort — likely to rouse passions on all sides of the highly divisive issue — as “policy reform that controls immigration and makes it an orderly system,”
In other words, exploit the stupidity behind the "I don't mind legal immigrants, just illegal immigrants" mantra; "well they're all legal now, so stop complaining or we'll know for sure you're a racist.
Reagan gave us amnesty and said it would never be necessary again since the borders would be controlled going forward. Fooled me once...
ReplyDeleteSo there is still some hope for the the blacks of Europe then.
ReplyDeleteI know The Derb ran the numbers at some point and found that those who want outright amnesty are on the fringes of politics, the only thing that gives them weight is the moneyed interests backing them up. Given Obama’s predilection for bailouts, it's probably not the best time to be on the same side as the rich elite on yet another issue.
ReplyDeleteCongress has been getting dumber through the years so it wouldn't surprise if they tried to work something through, but it also wouldn't surprise me if they said that they'd "get right on it" and then threw into some black hole committee.
Steve - it's not politically stupid. The "R" word will be thrown around freely and there are many millions of dollars backing this. Obama is a high-time preference individual. His pension, directorships, speaking fees, book advance, tenured teaching, etc., are in the bag. Business wants more customers, government wants more people on the FICA payroll so it's going to happen.
ReplyDelete--Senor Doug
Isn't it time for Republicans to step up to the game of reward for defiance of American law? Something along the lines of, "if Democrats continue to thwart the application of immigration law and enforcement in this country in order to benefit people who vote for them, then we are going to come up with some laws we don't want to enforce. Perhaps we can start with the laws that protect the persons and property of illegal aliens."
ReplyDeleteThe Democrat establishment will howl, but what are they really going to say? After all, many of them have openly demanded non-enforcement of immigration law and amnesty for transgressors. If Republicans step up and demand the selective disregard of some legislation that the Democrats hold dear, who's to call the kettle black?
If Republicans step up and demand the selective disregard of some legislation that the Democrats hold dear, who's to call the kettle black?
ReplyDeleteThis would be a lot easier to do if we had not just lived throgh eight years of Bush kow-towng to to the open borders interests. And if the GOP had not nominated John McCain, the very face of the amnesty movement.
The GOP needs another Lincoln.
Amnesty is one word, not to mention issue, that will rally opposition. Much the same way Iraq did in W, Amnesty will be the spark that upends the Dems apple cart. President Chia might be biting off more than he can chew.
ReplyDeleteA little OT, but George W. Bush was probably the last white president our country will have. With non-whites calculated by the census department to become the majority by 2042 (it'll be more like 2025, if you ask me) both parties will be falling all over themselves to nominate black/brown/yellow candidates. I'll even go a step further and say that even qualified, magnetic, telegenic white male candidates will be purposely pushed aside because they represent "the past."
ReplyDeleteThe end result of all this (i.e. PC run amok, large scale, out of control 3rd world immigration, Obama's plans to "sovietize" the economy, etc. etc.) of course, could be the enactment of sort of "reverse Jim Crow" laws that not only make it legal to discriminate against white males, but make it illegal not to.
Go on, make fun of these ideas. Then tell me the same thoughts haven't occurred to you too when you let your imagination wander a little bit.
As others have noted, this is a politically SMART move by Obama, at least for 2012. One area that unites the radical left of academia with big business and the neo-con cabal is the idea that unlimited immigration is just dandy. There don't seem to be any powerful conservative voices in media or business willing to even consider stopping immigration. Rich Republicans like cheap gardeners and nannies just as much as the Democrats. So who is Obama going to offend? And I think Steve's right - most elites would far rather have a Latino domestic than a Black. It's ironic that our first Black President will be the one to put the nail in the coffin for Black aspirations in this country. Let's not kid ourselves - immigration hurts Blacks even more than it does Whites. And once Latinos do achieve real political power, let's see how favorable they're going to be to affirmative action for Blacks, I'm guessing not very.
ReplyDeleteI doubt this will go very far. O made a promise to some Hispanic groups - and this is his way of appearing to honor the promise. Obama's really just put the issue on the very back burner, on the lowest heat setting. By the time it gets any real attention, Midterm elections will be becoming a factor.
ReplyDeleteYes, he very very probably favors amnesty (he is President of the Planet, after all) but not enough to burn up massive quantities of political capital that could otherwise go towards health care reform, and even the cap-and-trade foolishness. Bush wrecked what was left of his presidency on the shoals of incomprehensible immigration reform. Obama, who is cautious by nature, is also probably a lot smarter than Bush.
Sorry amenesty will succeed and the republican elite or the money backing it will make sure no one but a kosher mccain like figure gets to run in opposition to obama.
ReplyDelete"This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this." - Senator Edward Kennedy, 1986
ReplyDeleteObama's really just put the issue on the very back burner, on the lowest heat setting.
The idea that he raised the issue to try to please Hispanic groups is highly likely. But it will still cut into his popular support, and increase the perception that he's an extremist who's out-of-touch with the American mainstream; who's trying to increase the labor pool and drive down wages at a time of growing unemployment. We all thought that Obama & Co. were on their game. Not so much.
Despite five amnesties since 1985, the country had about 1.5 million illegal workers by the time the government began its latest legalization process.
ReplyDeleteThis quote from a Businessweek article on Spain's 2005 amnesty. Amnesties never work. They never ever ever ever work. VDare (I think) had a great article a few years back detailing all of the various amnesties in various European countries that always result in attracting more illegal immigrants.
The BW article ends with this quote: "Until the developed world offers other solutions to these countries, he says, 'the inflow of immigration will be unstoppable.'"
Really - "unstoppable"? How 'bout government stop it the same way it stops every other activity it doesn't like: by passing laws against it, and then enforcing those laws.
T99, are you by any chance two different people? because sometimes you make a ton of sense, and sometimes you're just another evil neocon.
ReplyDelete(this is one of the times you make a lot of sense)
Karl Rove said: obama expects things to get worse - both in the economy and his loss of popularity - and wants to get everything started ASAP on his plan for permanent majority before americans wise up to how cluelessly left wing he really is...
ReplyDeleteThis was my thought, exactly.
Steve:
ReplyDeleteyou should get a lot of use out of this in the coming debates:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/04/07/us/20090407-immigration-occupation.html#view=all
"Perhaps we can start with the laws that protect the persons and property of illegal aliens."
ReplyDeleteThat has been my solution for years. All monies earned and property owned by violators of US Immigration law would be confiscated or frozen by the government the same way they do to the ill-gotten gains of drug dealers and assorted financial scam artists. Prove it's really YOUR property and YOUR identity, and that you earned income while legally in the US, and it then is returned and accounts unfrozen.
The same would also apply to everyone committing identity fraud via consular cards and stolen SSI numbers. This could apply to anyone that also cannot prove their current identity contiguous with their foreign origins.
Not that any of this will ever be done to illegals, but just think about this the next time you run across a news story of native US citizens that don't seem have their papers in order, and how law enforcement will selectively decide to make it federal case.
We know he wants to be an Abe Lincoln sort, right?
ReplyDeleteI dont think it's a stretch to say that the man who is the first minority POTUS feels that his presidency must go down in the books as historic for reasons that go far beyond his mere election. That would not put him in Lincoln's league.
I think the guy is a narcissist, plain and simple. I don't think his liberal agenda is based on firmly held beliefs at all. I think they are a means to an end and that end is a kind of beatification.
Illegal immigration? Amnesty? He needs socially divisive issues, a civil war of sorts to put himself right up there with Abe. He can't do that unless there is great division in the country. There can be no messianic presidency unless there is such social upheaval and division.
Yeah, maybe we are seeing the seeds of a civil war.
Just as a practical matter, when you have the political elites of both parties, big business, organized labor, all mainline religions, big philanthropy, the media, and the education establishment all on the same side of an issue, any issue, you can be 100% sure that their intention is to fuck the American people.
ReplyDeleteObama, who is cautious by nature, is also probably a lot smarter than Bush.
ReplyDeleteBased on what? And what's "a lot"?
If we could see his SAT scores we'd have something to go on (besides his incoherent off-teleprompter rambling).
Notice that the people cosponoring these immigration bills in the House are nearly all ethnic minorities: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/warren_the_coming_collapse_of_the_middle_class/#c72737
ReplyDeleteEvil Neocon, weren't you predicting amnesty passing last time? That was before the meltdown, with a Republican president pushing it hard. I doubt Obama's as in love with mestizos as Bush. Granted, there are more Dems in Congress, but there are lots of center-leaning Dems in Congress. And lots of Dem voters who signed on for Hope and Change over Yosemite Sam, but not for amnesty.
ReplyDeleteI think this Amnesty has less chance of passing than the last one.
I don't see this as stupid from Obama's standpoint. He has 98% of the black vote no matter what. If he can secure 75% of the hispanic vote he has a lock on the presidency. Amnesty is all about insuring that the hispanic vote is absolutely locked in the Dem column. Let's not forget that white single females and white single mothers are securely in the Dem fold. So from now on even if Obama and the Dems get only in the low 40% range of the white vote he and they have a lock on the election.
ReplyDeleteOut of curiosity, is there any restriction on which famous names we can use as as pseudonyms? I mean, assuming that's not the real Karl Rove there....
ReplyDeleteWow, opinion is really divided on this one. Half the commentors are absolutely positive that amnesty will pass, half that it won't. Is anyone taking bets on this?
ReplyDeleteLN, I'm not even close to sure. I just think the grass-roots opposition to the last amnesty (which was the only thing to hold the bridge, i.e., it was very broad) was small potatoes next to the opposition we'll get next time.
ReplyDeleteI bet the tea party organizers are sharpening their knives right now.
Russ - thinking outside the box - very interesting....
ReplyDeleteAmnesty is all about insuring that the hispanic vote is absolutely locked in the Dem column.
ReplyDeleteNo. You make the same mistake as John McCain - the mistake of believing that the Mestizo vote is in play. Amnesty and mass immigration is about extending the Democratic Party's voting base. Amnesty is especially effective because it's given to groups mostly likely to vote Democrat in perpetuity - low IQ, low earning racial minorities.
Just as a practical matter, when you have the political elites of both parties, big business, organized labor, all mainline religions, big philanthropy, the media, and the education establishment all on the same side of an issue, any issue, you can be 100% sure that their intention is to f--- the American people.
Indeed. But big philanthropy is a bit on the ropes these days. Their donations are down and their endowments, too. The same goes, I suspect, with churches. Charities and churches will not want to be taking a stand against their middle class donors at a time when these people are already pinching pennies, and with the internet any behind-the-scenes push for amnesty will become widely known.
As for the political elites and big business, people have less faith in them than ever. Times like these are when political earthquakes occur, and no politician wants to find himself standing on a political fault line.
Republicans, meanwhile, are looking for every issue they can find to reclaim their base and the majority. RINOs may want to join the amnesty bandwagon but they will not do so for fear of being betrayed by Democrats trying to save their own hides - Chris Dodd, Blanche Lincoln, etc.
Big business is down. The political establishment is down. Charities are down. Churches are down. So with all the usual caveats, this is a very bad time to be pushing for amnesty.
The biggest chance amnesty has of passing is if it becomes a poltiical Hail Mary - a way for the doomed political establishment to give the middle finger to the present voters and to 'form a new people,' in hopes that the new people will be more naive than the old people.
There can be no messianic presidency unless there is such social upheaval and division.
A worthy observation. Some talking head (Dick Morris?) suggested that Obama doesn't necessarily care to get re-elected. He'd rather force through his socialist agenda - an agenda that would be nearly impossible to reverse. I think there is a lot of truth to that. In fact I'm not sure Obama is temperamentally capable of lasting as president that long. He's scarcely been able to hold on 3 months, let alone 8 whole years. He'll be carried out in handcuffs or a straight jacket.
T99, are you by any chance two different people? because sometimes you make a ton of sense, and sometimes you're just another evil neocon.
Must be chimerism. He's carrying the ghost of his dead twin inside of him.
Obama, who is cautious by nature, is also probably a lot smarter than Bush.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably wrong. Bush did quite well on standardized testing in school and the military. And Obama keeps making one stupid mistake after another. Why is it everyone assumed Bush was an idiot when he stumbled in public speeches but Obama is "just tired" or "has a lot on his mind"?
How do you say 57 states in Austrian?
This could be Obama's gays-in-the-military moment. Sacrificing universal healthcare for the whole American population to a relatively unimportant minority issue, in this case a foreign one.
ReplyDeleteObama, who is cautious by nature, is also probably a lot smarter than Bush.
ReplyDeleteHmmm, that provoked at least two responses. OK, I did use the word probably. Here's my take: Bush may have been reasonably bright in his early years but something may have happened along the way to reduce the efficiency of those brain cells. It's more the weight of his many really bad, short-sighted WH decisions. How many times in these last few years have many of us asked ourselves 'what was he thinking?' In other words - it's more about Bush's lack of smarts than a high regard for Obama.
That said, I will add that there was thing that caught my attention about Obama early on in 2007: his endorsement by possibly the only person on Wall Street still worth admiring - past Fed Chief Paul Volker.
Also note that I am a stock investor and pretty much blame the whole current economic fiasco on the policies, actions, and inactions of the Bush administration. So yes, I am a tad biased.
It is a real shame with the Black supremacists that they do not see--or care--that they are hurting their owm interests in aiding and abetting the Mestizo invasion.
ReplyDeleteIn a country--and world, thanks to Globalism (Globaloney)--of scarcer and scarcer resources, the Mestizo's will be your direct competitors in Post-European America.
Like Whitey or not, the Mestizo's absolutely hate your guts, and have no qualms in showing and/or acting on it.
And being 'minorities' themselves they are JUST AS entitled to AA as you guys are.
With their numbers growing by leaps and bounds thanks to (h)immigration, even without their disdain and contempt, there is just that many more to compete with!
So much for your puppet leader (N)Obama "looking out' for 'you".