One of the more powerful speeches Obama has given in years. Really well delivered.
I think we can all agree that immigration reform is drastically needed, but likewise question the current methodology bringing it into the fold.
One of the more powerful speeches Obama has given in years. Really well delivered.
I think we can all agree that immigration reform is drastically needed, but likewise question the current methodology bringing it into the fold.
Even as someone left of center, I totally agree. A lot of terrible precedents (on both sides) in terms of executive power over the past few decades. Not saying this cause is particularly right--although immigration reform is needed--but the Constitution (and I"m not a constitutional purist) doesn't allow for decisions to be made solely on the merit of the cause. We will hopefully see something come through the front door with the new Congress.Originally Posted by Hawk
Chess match begins. Smart move politically by Obama. Dems were likely to win the next few presidential elections barring a catastrophe because of the shifting demographics in the electorate. I think this will help increase the odds. Last thing the GOP needs is another civil war between establishment and Tea party.
GOP numbers guys like Rove know they need the Hispanic vote to have any chance in 2016. And how they go about the next two years is going to be telling. Either the Presidential candidates will tell Boehner and McConnell not to pursue a long drawn out fight for two years that might hurt the party (Republican debates are a few months away already!) Or they go straight for impeachment proceedings which could spell a pr nightmare.
Forever Fredi
I don't disagree that a large--perhaps the largest--part of this is the partisan chess match, but is that any way to run the proverbial railroad? That said, the American public seems to want compromise . . . until they get the results of the compromise and then they forget what the definition of the word compromise is. My guess is Eric Cantor's political carcass will be paraded through the GOP caucus' meetings when this issue is discussed.
I didn't hear the speech. Did he say they'd be given legal status or that we just wouldn't prosecute? Haven't followed this closely.
Temporary legal status without fear of deportation once they register for criminal background checks and pass.
I believe the technicality is he's redirecting the agency to focus their efforts on illegal aliens with felony records, not those with clean records.
Forever Fredi
This may be a smart political move for Obama, who has nothing to lose at this point, but not necessarily for the Democratic party. The action is going to expose them to attacks on both the policy AND the practice. Poll numbers suggest tepid suport for the executive measures now, but I question them holding after the incoming onslaught of the GOP 'anarchical' overreach characterizations and rhetoric which will absolutely incite the base and nab some swing votes.
Republicans also have a trump card by the name of Jeb Bush, who ironically has used language nearly verbatim to the Bush 43 'part of American life' quote Obama mentioned in his speech tonight. Jeb's passion for bi-partisan immigration reform is well documented, and allowing him to eke onto the national stage at a political moment like the current is almost like opening Pandora's box for the Democrats. He could come out as an across-aisle compromiser if the Republicans eventually pass legislation that even remotely mimics Obama's orders. But then the law is no longer a Democratic trophy for the 2016 election.
Last edited by Hawk; 11-20-2014 at 11:07 PM.
There's no way Jeb Bush would get elected.
He may be the most likable Bush in the family, but there's no way the country would ever elect another Bush family member in the White House again after 43.
Rand Paul has a better chance of getting elected than Jeb.
Forever Fredi
Agreed all the way around. As to your last sentence, "elections have consequences" only when Obama's party wins.
BedellBrave (11-21-2014)
I agree with ole Sav that is a great political move by Obama. I think the only two plays here for the pubs is to put an immigration bill on Obama's desk with amnesty in it. A true bipartisan bill if you will. Or just ignore it.
thank you weso1!
You're right on the mark weso.
I think it is more raw politics than partisan, although the former spills into the latter. I don't know if Harry Reid was protecting Obama--as he claims he was--or simply protecting his members from having to take votes on bills the House sent over to the Senate, but come January, fielding the House's stuff will fall to McConnell and we'll see what he does. The House Republicans have concocted this internal rule to their operations that any bill that does not have a majority of votes of the Republican caucus can't go forward. That's really put Boehner in a bind.
The shoe is on the other foot to some extent now, because the Senate and House are of the same party and Obama has laid down the gauntlet for Congress to pass a reform bill and he has the veto and can force the action to some extent. He'll be demonized to a great extent by his opponents, but we'll have to see how that plays in the press and with the voting public. I think Obama is challenging Congress to hoist a banner on the issue. The thing I've noticed during the past two administrations is that the American people want action until they get action. Then it's "Crap. Socks and underwear for Christmas yet again."
There will be a partisan element to this, but I think the raw President v. Congress contest is the more interesting one. Of course, given the differences in political party control of those branches, there will be spillage.
As I've been getting older, socks and underwear for Christmas are almost perfect gifts.
Forever Fredi
I actually do need socks this year.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
