Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?

posted at 3:31 pm on December 9, 2013 by Allahpundit

A simple point from Alex Seitz-Wald. Amnesty is the big Democratic prize for Hopenchange 2.0 and there was no better time to muscle Republicans into it than in the first flush after their traumatic election loss last November. The RNC was already murmuring about rebranding the party to appeal more to Latinos; business groups, which have been waiting for immigration reform for ages, would have happily gone all in to pressure Republican fencesitters in Congress.

And then things changed.

Lanza’s rampage altered the debate in Washington. Suddenly, priority No. 1 wasn’t immigration reform but gun control. The base that had just elected Obama was clamoring for background checks and magazine-clip restrictions, threatening to desert the president before his second inauguration. Many in Washington, including Connecticut’s Democratic senators, were convinced that the much-feared National Rifle Association had become a “paper tiger.” The gun lobby’s muscle hadn’t been truly tested in almost a decade, and NRA head Wayne LaPierre’s bizarre press conference days after the shooting seemed to confirm that the emperor had no clothes.

That meant immigration would have to wait. The clock was ticking on both gun control and immigration, but Democrats moved ahead with gun control first, recognizing that as the memory of the tragedy at Sandy Hook faded, so too would the impetus for new laws. The Senate spent months on a bill, which eventually got whittled down to a universal background-check provision, before it finally died at the hands of a Republican filibuster in mid-April.

In the process, the administration fatally, and irrevocably, antagonized the populist libertarian Right, the same people whom mainstream Republicans and Democrats needed to stay on the sidelines for immigration reform to succeed. By engaging in such an emotional, polarizing issue so early on, Obama poisoned the (admittedly shallow) well of goodwill and the willingness to compromise by Republicans before his term even began in earnest. When a comprehensive immigration bill eventually did pass the Senate in late June with GOP support, the House opposition made clear that the bill had little hope of becoming law.

Fair enough. O’s base never would have forgiven him if he hadn’t seized the moment after Newtown to push gun control, and Democrats might have gotten an immigration deal on unusually favorable terms if they had pushed hard while righties were still licking their electoral wounds. It’s a missed opportunity for liberals. Two questions, though. One, per David Freddoso: Why didn’t Obama push amnesty in his first term if it was that important to him and his party? It’s true that immigration reform is dicey when the economy is as bad as it was in 2009 and 2010, but if O and Pelosi were willing to risk a ferocious electoral backlash in passing ObamaCare, they might as well have doubled down with immigration too. Why didn’t they?

The answer, I think — and this is proof of just how far back Democratic self-deception about O-Care goes — is that they didn’t really expect a backlash from health-care reform. They always believed, and still believe, that the public would come around on ObamaCare someday. As I recall, the lefty CW after it passed and Republicans started shaking their fists, warning of electoral revenge, was that the public just wasn’t used to the idea of reform yet and would gradually embrace the law. There might be more GOPers at the polls that November, but there would be more grateful Democrats too. You know how that turned out. One key difference between O-Care and immigration, though, is that Democrats always knew that the former would be party-line whereas the latter, per the efforts of people like McCain and Graham during Bush’s presidency, would attract some bipartisan support. It wasn’t crazy to postpone immigration reform, in other words, while they had a filibuster-proof Senate majority because they could always try to pass amnesty later with some Republican votes. Why risk an even stiffer backlash at the polls by passing two controversial reform bills instead of one if you didn’t have to? Stick with ObamaCare for now and wait on amnesty.

Two, more importantly: What makes Seitz-Wald or anyone else think that amnesty’s dead? It’s very much alive and will almost certainly pass before 2016. The one deep lesson Republicans took from 2012, no matter how wrong it might be on the merits, is (a) that they can’t win another election without closing some of the gap among Latino voters and (b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP. They’re not going to send their next nominee out there without something to show Latinos by way of immigration. It’s probably true that whatever ends up passing won’t be as much of a sweetheart deal for the left as an amnesty bill passed in, say, January 2013 would have been, but if the yardstick for a “successful” second term for O is passing a bill with some form of legalization, this term will be a success.

In fact, as I’ve said before, I think the disastrous ObamaCare launch actually makes immigration reform more, not less, likely. Boehner can’t make a deal with O when liberals are on the offensive; it’ll be seen as weakness and capitulation. If the GOP is on offense and O is on his heels, though, then Boehner has more room to maneuver. The more energized righties are and the more dejected lefties are about the midterms, the more Boehner will think he can get away with a big immigration sell-out with little fear of major consequences at the polls. In fact, since the president is typically held responsible for major policies enacted on his watch, some angry independents who disapprove of immigration reform may turn out in November to vote Republican even though reform will have passed with some GOP support. Most of the border hawks in Congress are on the right, after all; if you’re an average voter who’s disgruntled about amnesty passing, you’re more likely to identify with someone like Ted Cruz than with Harry Reid. All of which is to say, as long as Boehner thinks he has the political wind at his back because of ObamaCare’s endless pratfalls, he might be more inclined to make deals on other subjects.

The modern gold standard of disastrous second terms is Dubya’s and even he managed to get a big amnesty effort off the ground with Democratic help after Iraq and Katrina. That’s one more similarity to add to Ramesh Ponnuru’s piece today about how ObamaCare is O’s Iraq — as politically damaging as each was, neither was able to squelch immigration reform efforts. Amnesty failed in 2007 because conservatives, who’d spent two straight years on defense, finally found a rallying point to go on offense. That’s not the case this time; they’ve got ObamaCare for that. So what’s stopping a deal now apart from Boehner’s determination to remain Speaker in 2015?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Truth is that Romney could have scored big with the immigration issue with independent voters if he had made a big deal about it, like with truth oriented scare-ver-tisements and just talking it up. Instead Romney ran from that issue, equivocating like an idiot and just adding to the insufferable sense that Romney was a double talking issue-skirting smirking gutless squish.

Anyway, just a day after our Romney’s loss, among the truly spineless was Hannity that came on air and seemed to be blaming the loss on the immigration issue, and he said right then, when we were already in too much shock over the loss to Obama, said that he had “evolved” on immigration and was now for amnesty, giving the likes of Rubio and McCain and Graham their cue to join with Schumer and Reid in an all about push for amnesty. I still don’t understand why when Hannity had thus far seemed like a solid imperturbable conservative that he caved so easily on amnesty.

anotherJoe on December 9, 2013 at 3:48 PM

It wasn’t just Romney. All of Romney’s primary opponents were worse on immigration. Admittedly, Bachmann and Cain weren’t absolutely terrible on the issue (but Bachmann never stood a chance at the general election). How do we even get an electable GOP presidental nominee who is good on this issue? I despair.

thuja on December 9, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Think of where we were 12 months ago, comrades…
A socialist retrospective of the past 12 months and what might have been for the national Left.
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/think-of-where-we-were-12-months-ago-comrades-t12196.html
Our glorious Dear Liar, the most excellent maximum leader, barrack Hussein Obama the second had just won the election. Well okay, he had to cheat and lie his way to winning, but everything’s fair when working for the common good. Those ‘rethuggikkans’ tea party types were working against the interests of the government so it was only right that the government work against them. And it was okay that he lied about his wondrous Obamacare because his Dear leadershipness only cares so deeply for us.

We were at the dawn of a new age, on the verge of the glorious new world of next Tuesday and the ‘rethuggikkans’ were on the run. We even had them convinced that they could win by committing suicide by amnesty! It was a glorious time for comrades and national socialists of all stripes!

Then just as we thought things couldn’t get any better, we had the modern day version of a Reichstag fire right in our midst. As Democrat Ed Rendell so aptly put it: (The) Good Thing About Newtown is That it Was So Horrific.

Here was our golden opportunity to finally defeat those who would want to cling to their “commonsense civil right of self-defense”.

Ah yes, those were heady days, Comrade Cuomo even waxed dictatorially with talk of confiscation’s. This was a chance to finally to force them to register their guns, if not take them outright in the middle of the night.

Basic considerations of liberty and freedom could be easily brushed aside with an emotion based talking point that didn’t even need to make sense.

Some of the useful idiots were only too quick to beg that their Constitutional rights be forfeited (along with everyone elses) just so they wouldn’t have to be branded a child murderers and terrorists.

We all had our eyes on the prize – for once we had taken their guns all those ‘rethuggikkans’ would have to depend on us to protect them from our voters. Not to mention that we could do whatever we wanted in spreading the wealth with those ‘rethuggikkans’ unable to defend themselves.

But alas, it was not to be – those ‘rethuggikkans’ clinging to their outmoded ideals of freedom and liberty started pointing out that universal registration is but one step from confiscation and the destruction of their “commonsense civil right of self-defense”. They were unwilling to sacrifice their civil rights for national socialism’s greater good. They did not want to sacrifice their safety for the ability for the government to forcible redistribute the wealth.

And so, inexplicably those steps failed, and while our socialist national groups continue the fight for the step to universal confiscation, those ‘rethuggikkans’ see the danger are unwilling to compromise their civil rights one more time.

Now it’s almost 12 months later and how far we’ve fallen – no one is talking about confiscation’s or it’s stepping stone universal registration. The ‘rethuggikkans’ have even woken up to the extreme danger of suicide by amnesty. And the glorious Dear Liar’s accomplishment of Cloward – Pivening healthcare was too successful and now is an anchor around the neck of the party.

We may never again see this happen in our lifetimes – for only if we can convince enough useful idiots that our Marxist ideas can work after enough time for people to forget how they’ve utterly failed in the past.

Colbyjack on December 9, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Sorry, that should have been blocquoted:

Think of where we were 12 months ago, comrades…
A socialist retrospective of the past 12 months and what might have been for the national Left.
http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/think-of-where-we-were-12-months-ago-comrades-t12196.html

Colbyjack on December 9, 2013 at 5:33 PM

Colbyjack on December 9, 2013 at 5:33 PM

So true. Great stuff.

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 5:38 PM

b. Pity you ignored the ‘shut the f*ck up’ suggestion.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 5:19 PM

Bless your heart.

Well said!

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 5:27 PM

You have a comrade.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 5:41 PM

Now it’s almost 12 months later and how far we’ve fallen – no one is talking about confiscation’s or it’s stepping stone universal registration.
Colbyjack on December 9, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Wasn’t there some article on here today or yesterday in Esquire calling for confiscation? They’re still definitely talking about it.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM

You have a comrade.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 5:41 PM

So do you.

bazil9 on December 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM

So do you.

bazil9 on December 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM

I like my comrade, comrade.

And that in no way implies that I am comparing my comrade to the hagfish.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 5:48 PM

Surprised this has been on the hush here…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpWD0xtN3r4&feature=youtu.be

bazil9 on December 9, 2013 at 5:54 PM

No real conservatives ever supported amnesty. Only the RINO’s and frauds did.

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

False. You never supported amnesty.

RINO in Name Only on December 9, 2013 at 6:03 PM

↓ Army of One.

Axe on December 9, 2013 at 6:09 PM

Don’t be so sensitive. I don’t think we should pass amnesty. I’m seriously asking what should be done. How do we change the public’s perception of enforcement? Because the electorate and perception is just as much a problem as the executive.
 
happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:22 PM

 
It’s easy (and cheap). Offer an incentive to both sides.
 
Pass a law that says in six months employers will be fined $5000/day per illegal employed at that point and, if applicable, retroactively to the day the legislation is signed into law, and set up a crimestoppers-type phone line.
 
If the tip is true, the informant gets every penny of each fine that comes from the bust.

rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Wasn’t there some article on here today or yesterday in Esquire calling for confiscation? They’re still definitely talking about it.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 5:42 PM

Some are, but they don’t have the cache of it being the false choice of that or dead school children.

Back then ( last year this time ) the Socialist national left could get away with comparing anyone defending gun rights with baby killers.

Now, not so much.

Colbyjack on December 9, 2013 at 6:16 PM

Since no one was killed at Sandy Hook Elementary, it’s hard to say what the effect on 0b00ba will be.

Anyhow, remember, “Everyone Must Check In.”

Akzed on December 9, 2013 at 6:17 PM

OT – another reason to miss GW Bush

22044 on December 9, 2013 at 6:24 PM

It’s easy (and cheap). Offer an incentive to both sides.

Pass a law that says in six months employers will be fined $5000/day per illegal employed at that point and, if applicable, retroactively to the day the legislation is signed into law, and set up a crimestoppers-type phone line.

If the tip is true, the informant gets every penny of each fine that comes from the bust.
rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Nah, that would be a huge narrative fail. “Encouraging profiling from the citizenry.” “Modern day lunch mobs.” This stuff writes itself, the Dems/media wouldn’t even have to try.

We should push for the status quo till we get some modicum of support from the electorate.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 6:26 PM

More ‘smart politics’ as Allahpundit would describe it. The GOP is surrendering completely on the budget. This includes additional funding for Obamacare.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/192361-immigration-advocates-banking-on-budget-deal-to-clear-calendar.

What this boils down to is amnesty is a higher priority than stopping Obamacare.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 6:39 PM

Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?

No, Obama’s first term wrecked Obama’s second term.

It’s the only sane answer here.

The economy he never came close to fixing in the first term, the Obamacare he pushed through crookedly in the first term, the corruption in the IRS he forced through in the first term to help him get a second term, the lies he told about “if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance” in the first term, the multiple-failure-and-attendant-corruption that was Benghazi that happened in his first term, etc.

Every so-called “second-term scandal” actually happened in the first term, and was just papered over until after the election.

Newtown was nothing more than Obama trying to do in the second term what he thought he had gotten away with in the first term, only this time with gun control as the near-and-dear-to-his-little-progressive-heart issue.

It does sound like the typical shallow analysis of media types, though, to act like the first thing that seemed to go sour in the second term was the beginning of his problems. It was really just the culmination of his first-term failures.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 9, 2013 at 6:39 PM

OT – another reason to miss GW Bush

22044 on December 9, 2013 at 6:24 PM

Give the man a break.

He obviously didn’t have room to set up his teleprompter on AF-1 in order to know what to say.

avagreen on December 9, 2013 at 6:41 PM

The only way Obama’s 2nd term can be salvaged is if Boehner steers amnesty through the House.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 6:44 PM

It’s easy (and cheap). Offer an incentive to both sides.
 
Pass a law that says in six months employers will be fined $5000/day per illegal employed at that point and, if applicable, retroactively to the day the legislation is signed into law, and set up a crimestoppers-type phone line.
 
If the tip is true, the informant gets every penny of each fine that comes from the bust.
 
rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM

 
Nah, that would be a huge narrative fail. “Encouraging profiling from the citizenry.” “Modern day lunch mobs.” This stuff writes itself, the Dems/media wouldn’t even have to try.
 
We should push for the status quo till we get some modicum of support from the electorate.
 
happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 6:26 PM

 
Sorry. I forgot we were talking about the narrative and not results.
 
Carry on.

rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:50 PM

BTW, you do realize citizens would be reporting employers, right?

rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:52 PM

But now that we have WEBCAMS that the FBI can access, can Obama see us typing our posts here……………?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/fbis-search-for-mo-suspect-in-bomb-threats-highlights-use-of-malware-for-surveillance/2013/12/06/352ba174-5397-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story_2.html

Apparently, YES.

Smart TV’s with forward facing cameras so they can see in your living room (or media rooms) anyone?

PappyD61 on December 9, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Nah, that would be a huge narrative fail. “Encouraging profiling from the citizenry.” “Modern day lunch mobs.” This stuff writes itself, the Dems/media wouldn’t even have to try.

We should push for the status quo till we get some modicum of support from the electorate.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 6:26 PM

Yes, crime-stopper phone line would smack of a “rat out your neighbor” thing. Plus, the bottom line is that many people have mixed feelings about this because on the one hand, you get a serious problem with people coming in and becoming dependent on welfare, driving up hospital costs with emergency room visits (and so, of course, they’re exempt from the Obamacare mandate), committing identity theft, etc.

On the other hand, people can see the train wreck that is Mexico, and so it’s easy to sympathize with someone for being desperate to come here. Add to that the reflexive sympathy for anyone trying to get through the government’s immigration bureaucracy, and its natural for people to be on the fence.

However, you can still minimize the problem, by directly addressing certain related problems:

How about an anti-identity-theft bill, that increases penalties for social security fraud and things like that? If that isn’t an already an automatic deportation, then it needs to be.

Or for the emergency room thing – after destroying Obamacare, conservatives could (and should anyway) push for a mandate that anyone who abuses the healthcare system by visiting a hospital without insurance is required to sign up for insurance – if they are eligible they can apply for medicaid. But they are put on a registry of offenders, and must supply their social security information, fingerprint, etc., so that they can have their pay docked to gradually pay off a penalty, and/or to pay for the insurance that they are now required to have (this is what should have been done anyway, about the “free rider” problem – a one-strike-and-you’re-mandated law.) This has the advantage that someone here illegally must either submit fraudulent data and risk deportation, or not show up and thus not be a drain on the system. Gives a lot less incentive to stay, particularly for people who want to abuse entitlements.

As for Mexico being a celebration of suck, I’m not quite sure what to do about it, though one thing we could experiment with is not arming their drug cartels.

The point is that none of these explicitly attack illegal immigrants, and so their defenders can’t say “you’re being racist” without letting the cat out of the bag. What are they going to say, “How dare you crack down on identity theft? My constituents are dependent on that?” And in fact, the people who are most naive on these issues, and thus most susceptible to democrats pulling on their heartstrings, will be much less energized.

RINO in Name Only on December 9, 2013 at 6:57 PM

The point is that none of these explicitly attack illegal immigrants, and so their defenders can’t say “you’re being racist” without letting the cat out of the bag. What are they going to say, “How dare you crack down on identity theft? My constituents are dependent on that?” And in fact, the people who are most naive on these issues, and thus most susceptible to democrats pulling on their heartstrings, will be much less energized.

RINO in Name Only on December 9, 2013 at 6:57 PM

Well said.

bazil9 on December 9, 2013 at 7:04 PM

Allahpundit,
I don’t agree with your analysis.
Romney didn’t lose because he didn’t win the Hispanic vote.
Even if Romney had gotten 70% of Hispanic vote, he still would have lost.
The people who first suggested that Republicans need to win over more Hispanics were Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, among others.
Why would Republicans want to take electoral advice from them?
Just goes to show what utter morons McCain and Graham are.

dverplank on December 9, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Amnesty failed in 2007 because conservatives, who’d spent two straight years on defense, finally found a rallying point to go on offense. That’s not the case this time; they’ve got ObamaCare for that. So what’s stopping a deal now apart from Boehner’s determination to remain Speaker in 2015? 

Idiot. You assume conservatives can’t walk, talk and chew gum at the same time. Anyone who votes for amnesty will see my vote abstain from ever voting for him/her again.

AH_C on December 9, 2013 at 7:20 PM

Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?

Just another tired, old, incoherent, blathering, absurd story that tries to shift the blame away from Obama.

Freddy on December 9, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Allahpundit,
I don’t agree with your analysis.
Romney didn’t lose because he didn’t win the Hispanic vote.
Even if Romney had gotten 70% of Hispanic vote, he still would have lost.
The people who first suggested that Republicans need to win over more Hispanics were Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, among others.
Why would Republicans want to take electoral advice from them?
Just goes to show what utter morons McCain and Graham are.
dverplank on December 9, 2013 at 7:09 PM

Indeed. Romney lost because of single women.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 7:35 PM

Those darn kids, dying like that on Obama’s watch and messing things p.

Too soon?

Looking for an excuse and trying distractors.

And WTF is a “magazine-clip” anyway? True, magazines may contain a clip, but ….

ProfShadow on December 9, 2013 at 7:41 PM

The analysis of the 2012 election and closing the Latino margin in this post is just so far off the mark, it is depressing. Had Romney gotten the same number of votes in Ohio in 2012 as McCain in 2008, he wins. Why didn’t he? Because conservative voters and Ron Paul Republican voters stayed home (4,500,000 – 6,000,000 depending upon whose estimate you use). Romney lost Virginia, Florida, NH, and Ohio by a little over 400,000 votes. If they do not keep Morton Blackwell (head of VA delegation and on Rep Rules committee) trapped on a bus at the Tampa, GOP convention, then over 2,000,000 of Ron Paul’s 4,500,000 voters show up and Romney takes Virginia, NH and Iowa and maybe even Florida, as close as it was. That leaves Ohio. What happened.

1. Somehow, the bus driver who was to take the conservative members of the Virginia delegation to the Republican National Convention could not find a parking space. He would not stop. Why? He drove round and round, three times until the rules committee votes were over.
2. On board was an old political war horse from the pre-Reagan years, Morton Blackwell. He has trained college conservatives for over 30 years at the Leadership Institute. He was opposed to the new Republican rules on delegates. He was on the rules committee. He was intentionally delayed so he could not attend the meeting.
3. Then John Boehner took a vote from the floor on the changes. What do you know? The “ayes” had it. His teleprompter told him so. Someone with a cell phone spotted it. The video was posted on YouTube. That vote kept Ron Paul voters out. That kept out all those who are not part of the despised Republican Establishment.
Ron Paul’s followers went home furious.
Other aspects of this story can be viewed on Ben Swann’s Reality Check here: Reality Check ~ RNC Just Won’t Follow It’s Own ‘Rules’
And
Did RNC Scripted Rules Change Start A Civil War In The Republican Party
What they did to Ron Paul, Morton Blackwell and the Virginia and Rhode Island delegations just does not lend itself to the unity and support needed to unseat an incumbent president – but they did it anyway. My experience working in the Romney campaign and the election results tells me it had a significant negative effect (voter turnout for Romney significantly less than it would have been because many stayed home). It had very little to do with the Latino vote.
Just know this though; with the rules changes the GOP establishment forced through at their convention, Ronald Reagan would never have gained the Republican nomination. His administration would have been even better if Bush had not been forced onto the ticket and Bushites into his Administration. The Establishment picks have been awful. He was, not even arguably, the best republican president since FDR, and yes, better than Eisenhower. Although David Stockman is correct – Eisenhower cut spending and kept our debt under control and Reagan did not, and it increased substantially.

Falcon46 on December 9, 2013 at 7:44 PM

The D’s could have passed anything they wanted for 2 years.

They didn’t pass amnesty.

The message to Latino’s: you are useful tools, but we don’t need to cater to you as you are also clueless tools.

ajacksonian on December 9, 2013 at 7:55 PM

F the bitch. I’m done with civility!

JohnnyMojo on December 9, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Note to Right-minded opinion-makers: It’s time to drop the term “GOPers”. There has been nothing “Grand” about the Old Party in the years I can count without removing my shoes.

Nobody wants to be called a “GOPer”.

RushBaby on December 9, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Don’t be so sensitive. I don’t think we should pass amnesty. I’m seriously asking what should be done. How do we change the public’s perception of enforcement? Because the electorate and perception is just as much a problem as the executive.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:22 PM

Some unedited video of “pro-amnesty” rallies might help.

Considering they seem to consist mainly of people waving the Mexican flag, singing the Mexican national anthem, waving signs saying things like “We’re The Real Americans” and adding various insults about non-Latinos, and of course the flakes from La Raza and MeCha talking big about the Reconquista of the “Stolen Territories”, I strongly suspect that most people (including Latino American citizens, native-born or otherwise) would figure out pretty quickly that the “amnesty activists” aren’t really all that interested in just being “typical U.S. citizens”.

They’re looking for political power, and for “payback” for sins committed against their ancestors. Many of those “sins” being mainly the result of their having learned history from the likes of Howard Zinn.

I’d be all for amnesty, if I didn’t know that the Mexican government mainly wants its citizens here for three reasons;

1. They send lots of money home every year.

2. It provides them with a “safety valve” for malcontents, especially political opponents, by making it easy to get rid of their potential supporters, thereby avoiding any need to reform their own corrupt, inefficient, and bribery-ridden system.

3. The more “illegals” there are north of the border, the more the government in Mexico City believes that it will one day be a serious “power player” in United States politics. With the resulting largesse, in both aid and money (under the table) flowing right into the ruling clique’s pockets.

You may have noticed that Mexico’s president is in The One’s corner on gun control. Don’t expect any prosecutions re Fast & Furious in Mexico any time soon. The Mexican government is authoritarian leftist. They are looking at what The One is trying to do here, and saying “WTF took you so long?”

Mexico has swung violently from our enemy to our friend and back again for over two centuries. The nadir of our relationship was the 1846-48 war, with the 1916 Punitive Expedition and the Zimmermann telegram running a close second.

Right now Mexico is, at best, a distinctly unfriendly neutral. With a civil war in progress that they refuse to acknowledge actually is one.

As for those who think that drug legalization plus gun bans would solve all of Mexico’s ills, and ours, I have two words;

Columbia.

Venezuela.

clear ether

eon

eon on December 9, 2013 at 8:51 PM

It’s easy (and cheap). Offer an incentive to both sides.

Pass a law that says in six months employers will be fined $5000/day per illegal employed at that point and, if applicable, retroactively to the day the legislation is signed into law, and set up a crimestoppers-type phone line.

If the tip is true, the informant gets every penny of each fine that comes from the bust.
rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM

Nah, that would be a huge narrative fail. “Encouraging profiling from the citizenry.” “Modern day lunch mobs.” This stuff writes itself, the Dems/media wouldn’t even have to try.

We should push for the status quo till we get some modicum of support from the electorate.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 6:26 PM

Ok you two, this isn’t that hard. You just have the wrong destination. You have to send the money to a source that will conflict liberals.

Instead of sending it to greedy informants, send the money to local school districts. Say it’s “for the children”… “and their future!” How could liberals be against school funding?

dominigan on December 9, 2013 at 9:11 PM

Allahpundit,
I don’t agree with your analysis.
Romney didn’t lose because he didn’t win the Hispanic vote.
Even if Romney had gotten 70% of Hispanic vote, he still would have lost.
The people who first suggested that Republicans need to win over more Hispanics were Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, among others.
Why would Republicans want to take electoral advice from them?
Just goes to show what utter morons McCain and Graham are.

dverplank on December 9, 2013 at 7:09 PM

I think AP was being totally facetious here.

Unfortunately, there are other ‘conservative’ bloggers so far gone on amnesty, including some on this site (**cough** Guy … **cough** Jazz …) that it unintentionally comes off as an affirmation of their beliefs.

Myron Falwell on December 9, 2013 at 9:14 PM

Fair enough. O’s base never would have forgiven him if he hadn’t seized the moment after Newtown to push gun control


False to fact statement

Obama’s base has NEVER held him accountable for ANY of his transgressions against liberal orthodoxy.

Two, more importantly: What makes Seitz-Wald or anyone else think that amnesty’s dead? It’s very much alive and will almost certainly pass before 2016. The one deep lesson Republicans took from 2012, no matter how wrong it might be on the merits, is (a) that they can’t win another election without closing some of the gap among Latino voters and (b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP. They’re not going to send their next nominee out there without something to show Latinos by way of immigration. It’s probably true that whatever ends up passing won’t be as much of a sweetheart deal for the left as an amnesty bill passed in, say, January 2013 would have been, but if the yardstick for a “successful” second term for O is passing a bill with some form of legalization, this term will be a success.


Are you able to pay your bills fairly comfortably, AP?

Not worried about losing your job to someone overseas or someone here in this country willing to do it for a LOT less?

Outside of the Washington-NYC corridor things are much worse than they used to be. People who have jobs have rational fears of losing them. Many people work TWO jobs to make ends meet.

What happens outside of the “gentle meadow of thoughts” you inhabit, AP, when tens of millions of illegal immigrants are REWARDED for breaking the law? Are you so wrapped up in the theoretical political “benefits” you have NO CLUE a greater wave of illegal immigrants will follow?

We have idiots who work at fast food franchises DEMANDING $ 15/hour and bigger idiots in Washington supporting them – never mind that many firefighters DON’T make $ 15/hour and all they do is run into burning buildings to save people.

You know what the difference is between Ronald Reagan and yourself is, AP?

Ronald Reagan was a common sense conservative who saw America’s problems and fixed them.

You are a RINO herd following sheep listening desperately for the “narrative” being bleated out by the elites who wouldn’t know a common sense solution if it bit them in the azz.

Congratulations, AP! You’ve written a lot of foul tripe on Hot Air … but THIS article is EASILY in the Top Ten Tripe List.

PolAgnostic on December 9, 2013 at 9:31 PM

Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?
POSTED AT 3:31 PM ON DECEMBER 9, 2013 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

frankly, I disagree with the premise of the question

I don’t accept that Obama’s second term is wrecked…it’s not over yet

nonpartisan on December 9, 2013 at 10:05 PM

Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?

…nope!…those angry old racist white men did….when they dubbed the ‘affordable health care’……..”Obama Care!”

KOOLAID2 on December 9, 2013 at 10:14 PM

Obama’s base has NEVER held him accountable for ANY of his transgressions against liberal orthodoxy.
PolAgnostic on December 9, 2013 at 9:31 PM

And on cue comes damnpartisan

frankly, I disagree with the premise of the questionI don’t accept that Obama’s second term is wrecked…it’s not over yet
nobrains on December 9, 2013 at 10:05 PM

AH_C on December 9, 2013 at 10:19 PM

nonpartisan on December 9, 2013 at 10:05 PM

Such courage to pop in on the end ofa dead thread to spew your unsupported claptrap.

ManWithNoParty on December 9, 2013 at 10:34 PM

nonpartisan on December 9, 2013 at 10:05 PM

http://youtu.be/KwLNxcmJDrU

rottenrobbie on December 9, 2013 at 10:35 PM

How do we change the public’s perception of enforcement?

happytobehere

Does it really NEED changing? The fact that they haven’t shoved amnesty through already and are apparently waiting until after primary season to do it tells me they know that public perception is on our side.

xblade on December 9, 2013 at 10:37 PM

Just got this in an email. Pass it on.

AMAZING NRA support from where you’d least expect it—-Obama didn’t see this coming. If you want to share it, I’d suggest you pass it on quickly as it will most likely be pulled and deleted.

http://WWW.youtube.com/embed/9RABZq5IoaQ?feature=player_embedded

onlineanalyst on December 9, 2013 at 10:45 PM

Amnesty failed in 2007 because conservatives, who’d spent two straight years on defense, finally found a rallying point to go on offense. That’s not the case this time; they’ve got ObamaCare for that.

AP: Why cannot both serve as a rallying point for conservatives? Putting more illegals (er, undocumented) on a path to citizenship (ie., amnesty) intertwines two budget draining issues. We cannot afford the bill that is sure to come due.

onlineanalyst on December 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM

Meanwhile, we are now into the SECOND week of the Newtown shooting rememberance coverage by the msm. I wonder if this msm agenda pushing will continue into a third week?

Freddy on December 9, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Are you aware that a memorial concert for the Newtown slayings had to be canceled because of a lack of interest?

onlineanalyst on December 9, 2013 at 11:13 PM

Does John want to throw a Bo(eh)ne(r) to the protesters “starving themselves” on the National Mall?

onlineanalyst on December 9, 2013 at 11:15 PM

Obama’s problem is he went to Harvard Law school and learned how to circumvent the constitution. He got away with it during his first term now it’s catching up with him. He has no clue how to put forward a piece of legislation and work it through the system. It only worked when he had Democrats as far as the eye could see. With a Republican House, he just doesn’t know what to do besides be a community organizer.

You just can’t point to a shooting and say that’s the point, the point is, he’s in over his head and the events of the day make that more and more obvious.

bflat879 on December 9, 2013 at 11:41 PM

AP,

“(b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP”

That is a bunch of crap and you know it. Passing it would not make Latinos give the GOP a 2nd look at all; only you and McCain would believe that.. the political wing of the Latinos is like any other liberal group; they just want their share @ the gov’t teat & want to be bought off.

Intrepid767 on December 9, 2013 at 11:42 PM

Immigration reform is the whipping boy of the Democrats.

They really don’t want it to pass because it will hurt both unions and the African-American communities, core Democratic voters.

By keeping it burning, they can lure Hispanic voters without actually having to deliver anything.

J_Crater on December 10, 2013 at 12:54 AM

Allah has been in favor of open borders since as long as I can remember, dissing rule of law advocates as hopeless Neanderthals. I don’t know how he keeps his job at Hot Air.

If Michelle only knew.

Stepan on December 10, 2013 at 8:38 AM

If this country can no longer defend its borders it is no longer a country, only a fading empire ready to be carved up.

claudius on December 10, 2013 at 8:45 AM

The one deep lesson Republicans took from 2012, no matter how wrong it might be on the merits, is (a) that they can’t win another election without closing some of the gap among Latino voters and (b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP.

For the life of me, I still don’t understand how people can be this stupid.

there is Zero evidence that reform will move a single hispanic vote in the GOP’s favor. In contrast, there is a plethora of evidence that it won’t.

Yet, the GOP insists on this suicide mission.

I guess that really explains why the GOP is so bad at elections and at opposing the DNC. Everyone who is in the GOP “establishment” is an utter and complete idiot who believes things based on no evidence and no logic. Like McCain and then Romney (and their teams) believing that the media would be nice to them and treat them fairly because they are moderates. Or Boehner believing that Obama would stick to his word.

These are the people we are supposed to be supporting? I can honestly say that if an amnesty passes, I will never vote for another republican candidate again, no matter what. I’m already not likely to vote for a republican any time soon, nor give money or volunteer as I have in the past, based on almost everything they do and say (Mitch McConell – I’m looking at you), but passing amnesty just tells me that they are completely and utterly without the ability of thought.

Talk about being Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football.

Monkeytoe on December 10, 2013 at 9:17 AM

I honestly don’t know why media outlets, including this one, repeat the lie “Immigration Reform” – it’s about amnesty plain and simple. There’s 10′s of millions of people that want to immigrate every year. You can make the application a one page form and a $100 fee and it won’t make a difference, 10′s of millions of people still want in… the real question is do we want millions entering the country every year, or not? (and can we afford the great cost and damage to the culture?) If not, then people will wait years to get in, as they do now.

John_G on December 10, 2013 at 9:20 AM

The one deep lesson Republicans took from 2012, no matter how wrong it might be on the merits, is (a) that they can’t win another election without closing some of the gap among Latino voters and (b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP

Where exactly is the evidence to support that? I see none and most Latinos here legally that I know don’t support the proposals being pushed. All I hear are their laments about the extensive, expensive process they went to obtain legal status and that simply granting what equated to immunity to people who ignored our laws is incomprehensible.

“Solving” immigration has become the sine qua non for shallow political idiots who thinks it will solve the parties inability to attract Latinos. It’s not and frankly insulting to some of those same voters they are targeting.

You would think Republicans would take a cue from history. Republicans were by and large responsible for the Civil Rights Act. They fought racist southern Democrats and others to get that legislation passed. How did that work out in attracting African Americans to the party? Short answer. It didn’t.

Marcus Traianus on December 10, 2013 at 9:30 AM

The senate amnesty bill that Rubio got on board with and took a lashing for, was almost as big a clusterfark as ACA. Either he recognized it for what it was but went along to be the R cheerleader, or he truly believed in every big govt left turn it contained. Get in line, pay a fine, pay back taxes, or go home and start over, puleeze. It sounded like it was straight out of a dem frat party playbook. First of all, if I was living a better life here than back home and able to send a wad of money to the family, why would I want to become a citizen and have to pay taxes and live under zerocare and all the other effing laws citizens are subjected to. Most of them probably like the status quo they have an want to keep it.

Kissmygrits on December 10, 2013 at 9:53 AM

rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 6:14 PM

 

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 6:26 PM

 
Ok you two, this isn’t that hard. You just have the wrong destination. You have to send the money to a source that will conflict liberals.
 
Instead of sending it to greedy informants, send the money to local school districts. Say it’s “for the children”… “and their future!” How could liberals be against school funding?
 
dominigan on December 9, 2013 at 9:11 PM

 
No one would care. We already have billion dollar school budgets that are blown through with poor results, so what’s another $5K?
 
This appeals directly to the individual.
 
And trust me, there isn’t a single bleeding heart liberal who wouldn’t pick up the phone for that potential quick (and secret) $5000.

rogerb on December 10, 2013 at 10:07 AM

The one deep lesson Republicans took from 2012, no matter how wrong it might be on the merits, is (a) that they can’t win another election without closing some of the gap among Latino voters and (b) that immigration reform is an absolute prerequisite to getting those Latino voters to take a second look at the GOP.

For the life of me, I still don’t understand how people can be this stupid.

there is Zero evidence that reform will move a single hispanic vote in the GOP’s favor. In contrast, there is a plethora of evidence that it won’t.

Yet, the GOP insists on this suicide mission.

I guess that really explains why the GOP is so bad at elections and at opposing the DNC. Everyone who is in the GOP “establishment” is an utter and complete idiot who believes things based on no evidence and no logic. Like McCain and then Romney (and their teams) believing that the media would be nice to them and treat them fairly because they are moderates. Or Boehner believing that Obama would stick to his word.

These are the people we are supposed to be supporting? I can honestly say that if an amnesty passes, I will never vote for another republican candidate again, no matter what. I’m already not likely to vote for a republican any time soon, nor give money or volunteer as I have in the past, based on almost everything they do and say (Mitch McConell – I’m looking at you), but passing amnesty just tells me that they are completely and utterly without the ability of thought.

Talk about being Charlie Brown with Lucy holding the football.

Monkeytoe on December 10, 2013 at 9:17 AM

Funding for conservative candidates has come largely from businessmen, in resistance to the socialist tendencies of the Democrats. But as the culture has moved left, that resistance has faded. A lot of businesses are actually quite comfortable with the more moderate parts of the Democratic party. Not wisely, of course.

But amnesty keeps getting support because those same businessmen want cheap labor. In fact, as they crank up the minimum wage laws repeatedly, the cheap labor of illegal immigrants becomes more and more important to them.

At the core, illegal immigration is desired by Washington because their regulations keep making business more expensive, and they rely more on a large supply of cheap labor.

So even though most conservatives are against amnesty, the amnesty supporters are sources of a lot of funding, which means they have much more influence than their numbers would suggest.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 10, 2013 at 11:14 AM

In the 1960s CBS, even back then, was rolling out the left’s gun grab agenda with it’s “White Paper” documentaries propagandizing against this nations citizen owned guns.
The left must get the guns before they can force everyone to do their bidding in abject fear.
This is no longer an issue, but has morphed into an open plan. These folks believe that all personal evils are not only tolerable but should be sought after—except for gun ownership. What is it they intend to do to us once they’ve removed the guns?

Don L on December 10, 2013 at 11:20 AM

Funding for conservative candidates has come largely from businessmen, in resistance to the socialist tendencies of the Democrats. But as the culture has moved left, that resistance has faded. A lot of businesses are actually quite comfortable with the more moderate parts of the Democratic party. Not wisely, of course.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 10, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Big business – and wealthy individuals that make their money from big business – are perfectly happy with a large government and always have been.

Large gov’t regulates heavily – which makes it harder on competition to big business. Large gov’t can also be manipulated (through bribes and/or donations to candidates), which again helps big business because large gov’t picks winners and losers, and smaller businesses cannot compete in that atmosphere.

Big business also likes big gov’t, because big business can perform services for big gov’t and get fruitful contracts.

So, conservatives have long had the mistaken belief that “business” was (or should be) on the same side as conservatives. Nothing could be further from the truth and eliminating that false claim is important. Business gives money where it thinks it will make that money back. It does not have ideology – it has motive.

Some wealthy individuals act on ideology – but many more act on the profit motive. And more often than not, the profit motive is for larger gov’t. Rich people don’t fear big gov’t, because they can hide their money in tax shelters, send their kids to private schools, live in gated communities, and travel to and pay for the best health-care – regardless of regulation. So, they don’t care what the big-gov’t policies do to the little people.

Monkeytoe on December 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

He did it all by himself.

But he will BLAME it on Newtown.

RealMc on December 10, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Funding for conservative candidates has come largely from businessmen, in resistance to the socialist tendencies of the Democrats. But as the culture has moved left, that resistance has faded. A lot of businesses are actually quite comfortable with the more moderate parts of the Democratic party. Not wisely, of course.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 10, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Big business – and wealthy individuals that make their money from big business – are perfectly happy with a large government and always have been.

Large gov’t regulates heavily – which makes it harder on competition to big business. Large gov’t can also be manipulated (through bribes and/or donations to candidates), which again helps big business because large gov’t picks winners and losers, and smaller businesses cannot compete in that atmosphere.

Big business also likes big gov’t, because big business can perform services for big gov’t and get fruitful contracts.

So, conservatives have long had the mistaken belief that “business” was (or should be) on the same side as conservatives. Nothing could be further from the truth and eliminating that false claim is important. Business gives money where it thinks it will make that money back. It does not have ideology – it has motive.

Some wealthy individuals act on ideology – but many more act on the profit motive. And more often than not, the profit motive is for larger gov’t. Rich people don’t fear big gov’t, because they can hide their money in tax shelters, send their kids to private schools, live in gated communities, and travel to and pay for the best health-care – regardless of regulation. So, they don’t care what the big-gov’t policies do to the little people.

Monkeytoe on December 10, 2013 at 11:27 AM

This is largely fueled by the media’s inability to distinguish between what is business-friendly in general, and “big business.” Regardless, a lot of conservatives make the mistake of assuming that big business is a constituency of the right simply because the left is so anti-business. But big businesses are big enough to influence the laws passed, and use it more or less as a club against their competition.

Which is why I would identify as being for a free market rather than just supporting any business.

A good example is Microsoft. While I have no hatred for Microsoft just for being big, that doesn’t mean I necessarily support them. There are a lot of cases where they have tried to control the PC market. Not that long ago, they managed to completely kill off the netbook market by using their size and monopoly to pressure netbook manufacturers into putting Windows on all netbooks, which required them to expand the storage and memory of the devices until there was no longer a distinct price advantage over a regular laptop. This was done because the netbook market was a threat to their normal Windows and MS Office business, since the netbooks were running Linux, and had no need of MS Office.

Big corporations can also undermine the free market. It’s just that the government, having a monopoly on force, is usually the bigger threat.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Big corporations can also undermine the free market. It’s just that the government, having a monopoly on force, is usually the bigger threat.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 10, 2013 at 12:41 PM

I don’t disagree. I think conservatives need a lot of education on this though, because a lot of conservatives think that if “business” is for something, it must be conservative.

It’s actually very counter-intuitive.

As an example, it used to drive me nuts during the last presidential primary when commentators at conservative sites (like Hotair) supporting Mitt would point to his business background as proof that he is conservative. I would argue endlessly with them that his business background proved nothing with regard to his ideology, and they simply could not understand my point. They just assumed anyone who had a “business” background was implicitly a conservative.

Monkeytoe on December 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM

So what’s stopping a deal now apart from Boehner’s determination to remain Speaker in 2015?

Primaries. Any Republicans who try to back Amnesty will get seriously hammered in the primaries. And by the time primary season is over, it will be too late for big deals.

Greg Q on December 11, 2013 at 10:14 PM

No, Obamacare ™ ruined his second term. It was pure crap and now that we passed it, we can all see what’s in it.

As it happens, most people saw illegal immigration as a bigger problem than the lesser uninsured healthcare issue, especially in this high unemployment economy.

It’s just a shame that Obama chose a low-priority issue and turned it into a national crisis. Conservatives knew this, of course, but the press would not tell the real story.

All of the subsequent scandals are routine memorials to Democrat incompetence and the personal legacy of Brack Hussein Obama.

virgo on December 12, 2013 at 12:16 AM

Comment pages: 1 2