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

Lanza’s rampage altered the debate in Washington.

 
Poor guy. He must’ve had it so tough after those little kids were murdered.

rogerb on December 9, 2013 at 3:33 PM

Excuses, nothing but excuses. They are trying to shift the blame for anything away from Obama so his legacy wont be tarnished.

Johnnyreb on December 9, 2013 at 3:33 PM

100 comments or bust! :)

22044 on December 9, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Why didn’t Obama push amnesty in his first term if it was that important to him and his party?

Because every time he spun the pivot wheel it kept coming ObamaCare or the economy.

NotCoach on December 9, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Didn’t Katrina wreck Bush’s Second term?

portlandon on December 9, 2013 at 3:35 PM

I think Obama ruined his second term all by himself. The nation is getting to Obama Overload territory.

As for Obama and his minions, they’ll make any excuse to to away with their own failing.

portlandon on December 9, 2013 at 3:36 PM

It’s very much alive and will almost certainly pass before 2016.

Yeah, no. If 2014 is another 2010 you can forget about it happening before the next presidential election.

NotCoach on December 9, 2013 at 3:37 PM

I think the problem for the GOP if they pass an amnesty bill is that Conservatives will stay home in 2016. (I know I won’t support anyone who votes in favor of amnesty. Rubio is already dead to me and I can’t see anything short of a full mea culpa that would change that.) There’s nothing in it for them. They may think they’ll garner a significant-enough portion of the Latino vote to help them, but that’s McCain wacko-bird stuff. They won’t. And Conservatives will be pissed.

BKeyser on December 9, 2013 at 3:40 PM

No blame Obama

cmsinaz on December 9, 2013 at 3:40 PM

No. Obama did.

WryTrvllr on December 9, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Yeah, that bullet to the back of Kennedy’s head had a pretty negative impact on his ability to get things done. It’s got to be a lot tougher on Obama to have to be around to witness his failures.

/dumbass please

M240H on December 9, 2013 at 3:42 PM

Both parties will perpetually talk about amnesty under the pretense that they actually care about Latinos. Neither party will actually vote for an amnesty bill since that would ensure the offending party would be swept from power by the irate 80% white and black population. It will never happen.

cajunpatriot on December 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM

The second term has been fully capable of ruining itself, thank you very much!

NavyMustang on December 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Didn’t Katrina wreck Bush’s Second term?

portlandon on December 9, 2013 at 3:35 PM

Only because of the media and the millions of morons in this country who actually were able to mentally connect Bush to Katrina. Your IQ has to be mid double digits or less in order to do that.

cajunpatriot on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

gun laws won’t work on a state by state basis

guns need to be banned from the country period.

the argument that guns dont kill people, people do is retarded. of course guns dont kill by themselves, but guns allow crazy emotional people to inflict crazy damage in a short period of time.

I’m pissed beyond belief that this unnecessary tragedy continues to happen…

for all the gun supporters, answer me this:

How many mass shooting tragedies has occurred in countries with complete bans on guns versus the US? That defeats any stupid arguments you have.

nonpartisan on December 14, 2012 at 1:24 PM

how could this cost them the senate if 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households favor it?

the cowards who voted no, on the other hand, may be in for a surprise when reelection comes

nonpartisan on April 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Obama is showing his anger on behalf of the parents of newtown

He is angry that the congress is so limp as to not even able to pass something that 90% of Americans, 80% of gunowners, and 70% of NRA households support

he is livid at the cowards who have let the newtown victims die in vain

it is righteous anger

nonpartisan on April 17, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Erika, you have to understand, this issue is not political for the democrats. its a losing issue.

President Obama is pushing this not for political points, but to prevent more innocent deaths. Whether you agree or disagree with the policy, you must understand his intention is noble.

nonpartisan on April 22, 2013 at 8:05 PM

frankly, Im not informed enough to give an answer.

nonpartisan on May 1, 2013 at 7:44 PM

You can say that again. All emotion, no fact.

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

The real problem is RINO’s like Paul Ryan and John McCain, who support illegal alien amnesty.

Shame on any so-called “conservative” who supports a special “pathway to citizenship” a.k.a. amnesty for illegal aliens.

Mass illegal alien amnesty would be suicide not only for the party, but also for the nation.

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

He blew it all on his own.
He need not worry though, the repubic’s will be throwing him a bone on amnesty first chance they get.

De Oppresso Liber on December 9, 2013 at 3:46 PM

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.

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

Disgusted to see HotAir support amnesty.

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Democrats are political slime buckets.

TX-96 on December 9, 2013 at 3:49 PM

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.

What bullshit this is. The morons in the GOPe who actually think this way need to understand that in a coalition party, majorities have first say. They are ruling as the tiny minority over the base who is nothing like them. May they be consumed in the final flames of the Republican party’s death.

nobar on December 9, 2013 at 3:51 PM

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

Since New Mexico is taken, they can’t agree on a new name for the former USA?

Bitter Clinger on December 9, 2013 at 3:51 PM

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

It would be much more fun if you had waited for the idiot to post something.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

The only way Republicans can win another election is to convince single women to not vote. “Latinos” have nothing to do with it.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

The GOP will witness such an ouster of RINOS and GOPe types if they pass amnesty that they will be shocked. No anti Tea Party RINO money will be able to counter the FURY that will be launched towards them should they pass amnesty. Don’t do it Boehner!

neyney on December 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Man, have I missed you.

itsspideyman on December 9, 2013 at 3:53 PM

Man, have I missed you.

itsspideyman on December 9, 2013 at 3:53 PM

Lots of people missed him.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 3:54 PM

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

I don’t care if you don’t find me entertaining…I’m not your court jester

nonpartisan on December 2, 2013 at 10:06 PM

nobar on December 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

It would be much more fun if you had waited for the idiot to post something.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Patience, Grasshopper! Gun threads attract nonintelligent like jackass manure attracts flies.

Del Dolemonte on December 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

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.
-Pro-amnesty liberal Allahpundit

However wrong it “might” be?

Illegal alien amnesty would eventually ensure that we could never again elect a conservative to national office.

Anyone who supports illegal alien amnesty should get no support.

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

You can say that again. All emotion, no fact.

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

I’m honestly surprised you don’t acknowledge that nonpartisan is just messing with us. You should be able to imagine the guy laughing as he posts his “liberal Obama supporter” tripe.

The dude is playing a character. He’s like a reverse Stephen Colbert without the money, fame and occasional funny.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 3:56 PM

Obama working tirelessly for Jobs for Illegal Aliens.

Congress, working tirelessly for the votes of non citizens.

Someone explain to me ….. As a American citizen voter, where do I go to elect someone to work tirelessly for Americans citizens ?

Mexico ? Poland ?

JayTee on December 9, 2013 at 3:56 PM

Del Dolemonte on December 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

My patience wasn’t the issue.

Sophie’s premature emasculation however…

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 3:57 PM

I do think the author is correct in saying that gun control killed amnesty for 2013.

Most pundits, even conservative ones, were supportive of amnesty. I think Ed’s first article after the election was, “ok, I guess we’re going to pass amnesty early next year”

Obama’s broken promises saved us from amnesty. He promised twice, that he would get it done in his first 100 days. We’re lucky he found a shiny object.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Quoting myself from the headlines.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 3:58 PM

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Gee hon, ya’ know who could carry that banner and win with it?

Sarah Palin.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Did Newtown wreck obama’s second term?

Whether or not obama’s 2nd term suffered any ill effects from the Newtown massacre, obama certainly enjoyed dragging the dead children through the streets of America, and paying their families to help him push his radical agenda – exploiting children, especially murdered children, is one of obama’s favorite things. Good times, good times.

Pork-Chop on December 9, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Resist We Much on December 9, 2013 at 3:45 PM

When I saw this…I thought of your response to allpartisans gloves are off comment.

http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/matt-vespa/knockout-game-goes-terribly-right-woman-wails-her-attacker

MontanaMmmm on December 9, 2013 at 4:01 PM

Damn kids!..How dare they get murdered while Obama was workin’ on something he wanted real bad??
/

Mimzey on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

They’re not going to send their next nominee out there without something to show Latinos by way of immigration.

This is the typical rant of ‘the political pundit class’. Most pundits write that ‘latinoes are racists’ that only want mass amnesty for ‘illegal latinoes’ and have NO OTHER objective when they vote!

I wonder WHY there has been a 27+ point poll shift among ‘latinoes’ away from Obama over the last few months? Could it be that amnesty has NEVER been a major ‘latino’ issue outside of the pundit class?

Freddy on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Most pundits, even conservative ones, were supportive of amnesty. I think Ed’s first article after the election was, “ok, I guess we’re going to pass amnesty early next year”

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM

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

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

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

Amnesty will widen the gap. More will continue to come, repeat calls for amnesty. GOP back to step 1, but with millions more voting against them.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

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

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Even Rush was awfully silent for months on amnesty.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:03 PM

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM

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

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Durn Right!

Hagfish and her four followers said so!

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM

the more Boehner will think he can get away with a big immigration sell-out with little fear of major consequences at the polls

I think we simply can’t trust Boihner.

Unless he double proves that he is going to be doubly reliably conservative, especially on amnesty, then we need him out as our leader. Now!

anotherJoe on December 9, 2013 at 4:04 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

When I saw this…I thought of your response to allpartisans gloves are off comment.

http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/matt-vespa/knockout-game-goes-terribly-right-woman-wails-her-attacker

MontanaMmmm on December 9, 2013 at 4:01 PM

That was really something. What about the cameraman: in on it? Sure seemed to be. He should be prosecuted.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Do the shorts make Michelle look fat?

BobMbx on December 9, 2013 at 4:09 PM

His second term is “wrecked”? News to me. Report back in three years and let’s see what’s “wrecked.”

As long as we have a GOP run by the likes of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell I’d be hard-pressed to say that the democrat-leftist’s prospects are anything but rosy.

rrpjr on December 9, 2013 at 4:09 PM

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

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

I really don’t know much about immigration or amnesty, honestly. What should be done about it? We’re not enforcing the law as it stands. Yet it seems that the populace would not allow for actual enforcement because of “grandmothers” or whatever.

Is there any better solution between amnesty and enforcement? Or should we just keep the status quo, which seems to be “unofficial amnesty” and very little enforcement.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:10 PM

You mean the super genius obozo didn’t foresee that reality might intervene and he’d have to deal with something on the fly?

Flange on December 9, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Republicans were about to minoritize whites and create millions of new Democrat.voters with amnesty because they just got trounced in an election but then Newtown happened?

Buddahpundit on December 9, 2013 at 4:12 PM

That was really something. What about the cameraman: in on it? Sure seemed to be. He should be prosecuted.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Sure he was in on it, listen to his oooh ooh oooh (Imma goin to get this so on tape so I can upload our cool game) that’s part of the “mystique”.

MontanaMmmm on December 9, 2013 at 4:13 PM

His second term is “wrecked”? News to me. Report back in three years and let’s see what’s “wrecked.”

rrpjr on December 9, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Indeed. There’s a lot of talk about Obama being in trouble. I think Ace is right and it’s all just part of “Obama the Movie” that liberals think they’re watching. He’s got to go through some tribulation to keep it interesting and heroic.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:13 PM

In fact, as I’ve said before, I think the disastrous ObamaCare launch actually makes immigration reform more, not less, likely.

I hope AP that this is your analysis of how dumb the GOP leadership really is and not that you actually think this is smart politics. There is nothing dumber than handing a President with a 40% approval rating and a crumbling comprehensive healthcare reform law a gigantic 2nd term policy achievement. Do you ever notice that Obama and Democrats in general almost never throw their base under the bus. There is a very simple tenet in politics. If you don’t have your base you have nothing. GOP leadership and DC RINO pundits are going to be in for a rude awakening.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Is there any better solution between amnesty and enforcement? Or should we just keep the status quo, which seems to be “unofficial amnesty” and very little enforcement.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:10 PM

We have to pass amnesty, to end “defacto amnesty” right?

Best solution is to replace the people in the executive branch.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Amnesty will widen the gap.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Exactly. Appeasement won’t work.

There will just be more calls for more open borders and instant citizenship for new immigrants and more redistribution to them, and so the Republicans will still not be able to compete with the Dems for the surging numbers (because of amnesty) of illegal voters.

Worse, is that amnesty would dampen a key motivator for independent voters to vote Republican.

Believe me, across this nation, independent voters back the Republican position against amnesty, and with that position undercut, many of these independents will be more likely to gravitate to the Dems if they agree with Dems on some other issues. Also, among the base, critical enthusiasm and turnout will be seriously compromised if amnesty passing. No, amnesty would be a disaster for Republicans. Don’t let any traitorous RINOs like Rubio tell you otherwise.

anotherJoe on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 PM

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.

LOL, one of the stupidest things an HA contributor has *ever* written.

Please – back that up, in *any* sensible way, with sound reasoning as to how legalizing illegals will help the GOP in *any* way.

Even *McCain* has said that he *KNOWS* the Democrats will benefit from this. Are you seriously suggesting that more than 50% of illegals will vote GOP at their first opportunity?

ARE YOU REALLY THAT F*CKING DERANGED?

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Sure he was in on it, listen to his oooh ooh oooh (Imma goin to get this so on tape so I can upload our cool game) that’s part of the “mystique”.

MontanaMmmm on December 9, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Well, then it seems the discipline dished out by the victim and bystander was insufficient. Definitely a good start though and the only way this behavior will be curtailed.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM

Instead of blaming Lanza, the author should blame incompetent Obama, whose only success was attaching his name to a train-wreck of legislation created and rammed thru by a supermajority caucus, who didn’t even read the law themselves. Other than that, it’s been crickets.

RSbrewer on December 9, 2013 at 4:18 PM

It’s very much alive and will almost certainly pass before 2016.

“Almost certainly” is complete nonsense. Stop pushing this defeatism.

Jon0815 on December 9, 2013 at 4:19 PM

ARE YOU REALLY THAT F*CKING DERANGED?

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM

He’s not taking that position. He is asserting that this is what the GOP establishment believes was the takeaway lesson from 2012.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:20 PM

We have to pass amnesty, to end “defacto amnesty” right?

Best solution is to replace the people in the executive branch.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 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

If we had started mass deportations when Bush tried his amnesty ploy, we’d almost be done taking out the trash about now.

BobMbx on December 9, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Most pundits, even conservative ones, were supportive of amnesty.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Um, no.

If they were *for* it, they are *not* ‘conservative’.

But thanks for playing.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:23 PM

If they are going to attempt amnesty it will be safely after the 2014 primary challenge deadline, period.

The GOP establishment is not going to kick a hornets nest by proving that they don’t have the spine to fight Obama even when he is at his weakest.

BKennedy on December 9, 2013 at 4:24 PM

fk amnesty

dmacleo on December 9, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:23 PM

When did you join bluegills in being the decider on who is and who is not conservative?

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Um, no.

If they were *for* it, they are *not* ‘conservative’.

But thanks for playing.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:23 PM

Rush Limbaugh is not conservative? He kept his mouth shut for months, and had Rubio on to sell amnesty. I think a huge number were shell shocked from the election. Mark kept his gloves off Rubio for months too. He’s not conservative?

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

*Mark Levin

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

ARE YOU REALLY THAT F*CKING DERANGED?

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:17 PM

He’s not taking that position. He is asserting that this is what the GOP establishment believes was the takeaway lesson from 2012.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:20 PM

I’ve re-read the piece, and believe that you are correct.

I stand corrected, and apologize to AP for the misunderstanding.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:28 PM

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Many righty’s and businesses are pro-amnesty for purely business reasons.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:29 PM

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Yep. The big money is all pro amnesty.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:30 PM

When did you join bluegills in being the decider on who is and who is not conservative?

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

When did you become the decider as to who is entitled to an opinion? Am I still allowed to have one?

If so, well…. shut the f*ck up.

If not, well… shut the f*ck up.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:30 PM

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.

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think depopulating Mexico in order to bolster Democratic Party voter rolls is not how Republicans are going to win future elections. Pushing amnesty in the name of immigration reform will, however, please big money Republican donors hot for some of that sweet, cheap labor an influx of millions of suddenly legalized workers will provide, so there’s that.

Every Republican politician who votes for this cynical travesty should be primaried, without exception. It’s time we had it out with the GOP Establishment, unprincipled sellouts that they are, and the money-grubbing opportunists bankrolling them.

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM

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

Enforcement of the laws preventing their employment would get many of them to leave on their own. No more citizenship to babies born here by foreign nationals would also stem the flow. And no more benefits or public education for illegals. Those three relatively easy steps would go a long way in reducing the number of illegals.

Flange on December 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Rush Limbaugh is not conservative? He kept his mouth shut for months, and had Rubio on to sell amnesty. I think a huge number were shell shocked from the election. Mark kept his gloves off Rubio for months too. He’s not conservative?

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Be consistent – point to instances where those individuals said they were *FOR* amnesty, then you’ve got a point.

I can point to endless examples of Levin saying he was *against* it. I rarely listen to Rush, so can’t comment on what he’s said or not said about it.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM

OT

I know the feeling.

BobMbx on December 9, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Every Republican politician who votes for this cynical travesty should be primaried, without exception. It’s time we had it out with the GOP Establishment, unprincipled sellouts that they are, and the money-grubbing opportunists bankrolling them.

troyriser_gopftw on December 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM

It kind of won’t matter; once done, primarying (sp?) Republicans who voted for it won’t matter, as the GOP will have already won their last election, perhaps ever.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Rush Limbaugh is not conservative? He kept his mouth shut for months, and had Rubio on to sell amnesty. I think a huge number were shell shocked from the election. Mark kept his gloves off Rubio for months too. He’s not conservative?

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

is being silent now the same as supporting?
I don’t listen to either often so am not sure of their positions.

dmacleo on December 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Seems like Allah was cheerleading for amnesty. I don’t see how I can interpret differently.

I disagree. It is not a foregone conclusion. Conservatives can fight and win multiple front wars on subjects like Healthcare, gun control, amnesty, and BBA. I’m not conceding.

kpguru on December 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Am I still allowed to have one?

If so, well…. shut the f*ck up.

If not, well… shut the f*ck up.

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Of course you are entitled to your opinion.

Just like I get to laugh at idiocy no matter which direction it comes from.

By all means, carry on.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM

No, amnesty would be a disaster for Republicans. Don’t let any traitorous RINOs like Rubio tell you otherwise.

anotherJoe on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 PM

and don’t let Allahpundit tell you that either.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Enforcement of the laws preventing their employment would get many of them to leave on their own. No more citizenship to babies born here by foreign nationals would also stem the flow. And no more benefits or public education for illegals. Those three relatively easy steps would go a long way in reducing the number of illegals.

Flange on December 9, 2013 at 4:32 PM

Those steps are far from easy. Each one would be met with serious opposition and would play very poorly in the game where Democrats excel, the almighty Narrative.

I’m not saying it would be impossible, but those steps would be hugely controversial and very difficult to pull off.

You need political will at your back. It’s not just about getting a few politicians to butch up. It’s about convincing a huge portion of the nation.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:38 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

My honest thought is that the best we can currently do is the status quo of unofficial amnesty.

The major problems with true amnesty are as such:

1. We can’t “fix” it down the line. Once these people are declared “Americans,” they are Americans forever. Obamacare can be undone eventually, when the government inevitably collapses through fiscal profligacy if nothing else.

2. We can’t afford it. Many immigrants are receiving benefits now, but having them legalized means that ALL of them immediately go onto welfare and Obamacare, which means gigantic wealth seizures, even bigger than what’s currently going on, will be required to support them. If you think Obamacare is costing us money, wait until we add in 30 million illegals with no jobs, education, prospects, and no interest in learning English so they can reverse this state of affairs.

3. Security. There is a very real chance of the government losing control of major urban areas where immigrant communities refuse to recognize government authority. The government’s grip on the cities is tenuous as it is, but legalization would likely mean the effective loss of control over places like California. Look to what’s going on in Europe to see how bad that will be.

Doomberg on December 9, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Rush Limbaugh is not conservative? He kept his mouth shut for months, and had Rubio on to sell amnesty. I think a huge number were shell shocked from the election. Mark kept his gloves off Rubio for months too. He’s not conservative?

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:27 PM

That’s complete BS.

Bitter Clinger on December 9, 2013 at 4:41 PM

I wouldn’t be surprised if a shadowy figure from DC called up AP and said

That’s a nice anonymous screen name you got there. It would be a shame if some how your real name was revealed. You know amnesty is a wonderful thing. You might want to consider supporting it.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 4:41 PM

In fact, as I’ve said before, I think the disastrous ObamaCare launch actually makes immigration reform more, not less, likely.

I hope AP that this is your analysis of how dumb the GOP leadership really is and not that you actually think this is smart politics. There is nothing dumber than handing a Presidentwitha 40%approvalrating and a crumbling comprehensive healthcare reform lawa gigantic 2ndterm policyachievement. Do you ever notice that Obama and Democrats in general almost never throw their base under the bus. There is a very simple tenet in politics. If you don’t haveyour base you havenothing. GOP leadershipandDCRINO pundits are going to be in for a rude awakening.

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 4:14 PM

My first impression on reading this was, “how did Guy Benson hack into AP’s HotGas account?”

AP, I know you tend to be fatalistic at times, but come on.

Myron Falwell on December 9, 2013 at 4:45 PM

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:38 PM

Relatively easy compared to deportation of 12-20 million people. Ending the anchor baby status and benefits would take a lot of political capital but it could be done easier than deportation. Enforcing the laws on businesses that hire illegals would probably use less.

Flange on December 9, 2013 at 4:48 PM

Myron Falwell on December 9, 2013 at 4:45 PM

he he

Wigglesworth on December 9, 2013 at 4:49 PM

is being silent now the same as supporting?
I don’t listen to either often so am not sure of their positions.

dmacleo on December 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM

Would being silent on Obamacare be the same as supporting it?

What about allowing Obama to go on your show to sell Obamacare?

Limbaugh Rubio Interview 1/29/13
http://therightscoop.com/full-interview-rush-limbaugh-interviews-marco-rubio-on-bipartisan-immigration-reform/

Levin Rubio Interview 1/23/13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U98HzM8B3Ks&feature=youtu.be

I know Mark and Rush are against amnesty, but they shouldn’t have left Rubio unscathed. They were against amnesty, but refused to aim the cannons at Rubio early on, allowing amnesty to go far in the Senate without public backlash.

Had Obama chosen amnesty before gun control, it would have passed without any significant opposition.

El_Terrible on December 9, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Doomberg on December 9, 2013 at 4:41 PM

That seems about right. Status quo is as good as we’re going to get for now.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Did Newtown wreck Obama’s second term?

Politics really IS a TV show. A MacGuffin. The story’s the thing. Reality, meh. It’s like the (apocryphal) story some American soldier told about patrolling a river in Vietnam. “We just wiped out a boat of Nazis!”, he said. “How did you know they were Nazis?”. “They were flying a flag with a Swastika on it”. “Those weren’t Nazis. They were Buddhists, you idiot”.

The soldier’s takeaway was, not the loss of innocent life, but that it ruined his story. So, Newtown wrecked Obama’s second term! Lousy first graders!

Paul-Cincy on December 9, 2013 at 5:01 PM

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?

There was a story in the NYT last year that did not get enough attention. In it, some early Obama aides admitted that they gave him the choice of three “big things” to do in his first term and told him it was likely that he could get only one of them. The three were: health care reform, immigration reform, and Cap and Trade. He chose health care reform. Immigration was deliberately put off until the second term.

rockmom on December 9, 2013 at 5:03 PM

1986 – “There will be NO more amnesty. We will SECURE our borders!”

2014 – “Trust us, we know what we’re doing!”

SCREW YOU!

GarandFan on December 9, 2013 at 5:10 PM

rockmom on December 9, 2013 at 5:03 PM

Healthcare ‘reform’ was rammed through not only without a single GOP vote in Congress, but only after a number of special deals were cut – and still by the skin of its teeth. Single payer, desired by the most far left in DC, was a non-starter even among the majority of the Democrat caucus.

Cap & Trade failed even with the huge 2009-2010 Congressional majority despite being tried – again because it was fundamentally bad policy. But despite the legislative failure, Obama still pushed through major elements of this via regulatory process (and overreach).

Banking reform was also slammed through by the Democrat Congressional majority – aka Dodd / Frank – it also transferred significant power from the legislative branch to the executive branch via the largely unaccountable Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

As for Immigration reform, the President and his allies also tried to ram through the Dream Act. When that failed to make it through Congress, the President once again undertook a unilateral power grab to defacto enact it and amnesty by choosing to not enforce selected immigration laws.

The progressive-fascist Obama agenda was tried quite extensively in 2009-10 – and with the exception of 2 elements, it failed to get through the Legislative Branch because the policies were just too far left. Yet, even with this rebuke, he took expanded executive powers to still move them forward regardless.

I don’t buy that this President or his allies took it easy in their first term – seeking to get only one big win. They aggressively pushed an agenda of ‘fundamental change’ on a number of fronts.

Athos on December 9, 2013 at 5:15 PM

No, Obama wrecked Obama’s Second term….

Oh, and Obama wrecked Obama’s First term also…..

Shall we go on?

ToddPA on December 9, 2013 at 5:15 PM

Of course you are entitled to your opinion.

Just like I get to laugh at idiocy no matter which direction it comes from.

By all means, carry on.

cozmo on December 9, 2013 at 4:34 PM

a. Why, thank you. So gracious of you.

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

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 5:19 PM

They aggressively pushed an agenda of ‘fundamental change’ on a number of fronts.

Athos on December 9, 2013 at 5:15 PM

Well said.

And they still won big in 2012. Where is this mysterious conservative electorate I keep hearing about? Even if more conservatives showed up in 2012, it would have been a very close election and therefor quite a stretch to call this country “fundamentally conservative.”

I don’t see how we have a political problem that will be solved by electing the right type of Republicans. We’ve simply got the wrong type of electorate.

happytobehere on December 9, 2013 at 5:22 PM

I tend to disagree that amnesty will happen before the mid-terms, I’m not even convinced it’ll happen at all.

Here’s the thing, while it’s true that Republicans may feel more bold if they’re on the offense, but that’s more than counteracted by two other forces at play.

First, the typical politicians mindset works against doing anything potentially controversial during an election. This is why things grind to a near halt during election years, and I don’t see a little extra fearlessness changing this.

Second, if you’re planning to offer some form of immigration reform, and you’re expecting to have additional votes and additional leverage in the not too distant future, why rush forward to agree with your opponents version of the bill? Republican strategists aren’t complete fools, any immigration reform bill put forward on their terms will heavily limit the number of illegal immigrants that can attain citizenship, assuming it even has a path to citizenship in the first place.

Basically, Republicans want a fig leaf to offer the Hispanic vote, but they don’t want to introduce 10mil plus voters whom are overwhelmingly inclined to vote (D.) As such, their ideal bill would do just enough to allow them to say they’re reaching out, but not enough so as to fundamentally change the political game as it stands.

If that’s the bill they want, then they have no reason in the world to move on it before mid-terms. For that matter, even after the mid-terms there are good reasons why it may not happen.

WolvenOne on December 9, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Midas on December 9, 2013 at 5:19 PM

Well said!

bluegill on December 9, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2