GOP senators: We’ll pass immigration reform next year if we take back the Senate

posted at 4:01 pm on May 15, 2014 by Allahpundit

Give Rubio credit for being candid about this. I think some conservatives are under the impression that if Republicans retake the Senate and thereby remove any agenda-setting power from Democratic hands, that’s the end of amnesty until 2017 at the earliest. Nope. The GOP is not going to risk another presidential election without something to show Latino voters on immigration. They’ll risk a midterm because Latinos won’t be a force in November, but they won’t risk it in a high-turnout campaign with the White House on the line.

And look. While it’s true that a Republican-only bill would be better than the Gang of Eight bill, it’s only marginally true. If you think Obama and the Democrats are going to agree to some sort of tough security-only measure without a deal on legalizing illegals too, you’re kidding yourself. They know that the whole point of this effort politically for the GOP is to make nice with Latinos and that the closer we get to 2016, the more desperate Republicans will be. That’s the Democrats’ leverage. If McConnell and Boehner try to pass something that, say, makes legalization conditional upon security improvements, Reid will either filibuster it or Obama will veto it and then McConnell et al. will panic at the possibility that they might not pass something before 2016 after all. That is to say, no matter how much the GOP blathers about border enforcement and security, what they’re really interested in — both for political reasons and to please their masters in the business lobby — is legalization. If they passed a security-only bill and did nothing to amnestize illegals who are here, that might put them in an even worse position with Latinos in 2016. Why on earth would they do that?

“I certainly think we can make progress on immigration particularly on topics like modernizing our legal immigration system, improving our mechanisms for enforcing the law and I think if you did those things you could actually make some progress on addressing those who are illegally,” Rubio said Wednesday evening of the prospects of passing immigration reform in 2015.

He said the Senate next year should pass immigration reform through a series of sequential bills that build upon each other to enact comprehensive reform. This approach would be more palatable in the House, he said…

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the lead author of the comprehensive Senate immigration bill, signaled Wednesday that Democrats would not be willing to join in such an effort

He said House Republicans have a narrow window between early June and the August recess to act.

“I am saying that if Speaker [John] Boehner [Ohio], [House Majority] Leader [Eric] Cantor [Va.], and other Republican leaders refuse to schedule a vote on immigration reform during this window, it will not pass until 2017 at the earliest,” he said on the Senate floor Wednesday.

In theory, having Senate Democrats serially filibuster a bunch of smaller, piecemeal GOP immigration bills would let Republicans argue in 2016 that Democrats are now the obstacle to amnesty, not them. In practice, it won’t work that way. Democrats will simply point out that they’re filibustering in the name of getting a better deal for illegals, which is true, and then Obama will issue an executive order before 2016 on immigration to show Latino voters that Democrats are still their bestest friends. They have lots of leverage, even as a Senate minority. Maybe, though, Senate Dems would agree to splitting comprehensive reform into smaller bills purely as a formality, so long as they get a good deal from Republicans on legalization. There’s no risk, after all, that the president’s going to sign a small bill on border security if Democrats agree to it and then veto a bill on legalization; Obama could refuse to sign anything unless and until the legalization bill has passed both houses. Why conservatives should care whether a bad deal is passed comprehensively or piecemeal is beyond me, but it sounds like that’s going to be the next way they try to sell this to the base. “We’re going slow, step by step, even though … we’re going to end up in the same place as the Gang of Eight.”

Anyway, via Breitbart, here’s your would-be GOP nominee wondering why anyone would question the economic dynamism that comes with importing lots of unskilled labor at a time when unemployment in America is already stubbornly high. Skip to 19:30 for the key bit.


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 3 4

In my life I have never seen a Party so out of touch with its base. The insistence on shunning the base will do the Party in. Whigs. We are closing in on a time where only the name of a new Party is left to choose. Great effort has been spent in trying to achieve change from within the Party. If this effort fails, so goes the Party, so goes the once great Nation.

Bmore on May 16, 2014 at 11:00 AM

Oh, and Meow.

Bmore on May 16, 2014 at 11:01 AM

This is another reason I support the Convention of States. The national GOP needs to be eliminated with term limits. Fedzilla needs to be reigned in.

NWConservative on May 15, 2014 at 6:01 PM

That may ultimately be the only thing left to save America.

Meople on May 15, 2014 at 6:07 PM

Problem is, to believe that this might save America you have to also believe that the federal government would recognize the legitimacy of the convention, the legitimacy of these new Constitutional amendments limiting it’s power, and would observe and behave in accordance with the new amendments better than it is observing and behaving in accordance with the Constitution we already have.

They already flout the Constitution and it’s limits – I have no expectation that they’ll suddenly learn a respect for it and *new* limits.

Midas on May 16, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Don’t you understand what Jake the Goose and V7_Sport have been telling you. We must elect Chamber of Commerce RINOs so they can team with the Dems to stab us in the back.
bw222 on May 16, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Yes!! Because the illegals will do the jobs Americans will not do. I don’t know about you, but since many Americans will take any job they can get, I never understood this BS argument

Brock Robamney on May 16, 2014 at 11:27 AM

You are totally thinking of it wrong.
Staying home is not meant as a poke in their eye. It is meant more as a behavior modifying reprimand such as you give a misbehaving child. You do not do it out of spite, you do it out of love with an eye on their future benefit. Trust me, I hate spanking my daughter. It would be nice if I could just let her always be happy, but it is not how humans work. The less I spank her when given cause, the more belligerent she becomes. She does understand that I tolerate her outbursts out in public far less than I do at home.
The GOP certainly are acting as children, they have no discipline and no core values. Some do, and those deserve to be rewarded. Each person should evaluate their potential candidates and decide what to do. But they should spend time on the phones to their representatives to remind them who they work for and what it is you want them working towards. It does no good to stay home and leave them wondering why they were abandoned.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 10:05 AM

It doesn’t work, and it won’t matter. They aren’t children. They are dogs serving their masters, with their jaws locked us, tearing us to death.

A poke in the eye? If they pass amnesty, I’m all for gouging their eyes out.

They will have killed us. There will be no going back. America will have become the world.

It will be a purely punitive ballot box attack, a once great, now dying, culture of classical liberalism lashing out with no hope or care that it matters at all to anyone but those whose eyes will be getting gouged out.

fadetogray on May 16, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Democrats have nothing to run on. Voter enthusiasmis at a modern day low. What to do?

This is what to do: convince Republicans not to vote. Suddenly, after hating on Boehner for YEARS, ValJayJay says “there is no difference” between Boehner and Obumbles. No, none at all. Don’t bother voting Republicans, because it won’t matter at all.

Says our friend Val.

MTF on May 16, 2014 at 1:03 PM

Amnesty would be the last straw for me in a long list of disappointments. Years ago I voted for a Dem because I thought the Republican wasn’t conservative enough. I regretted the outcome for years. 28 years later I have changed my mind again. I am a conservative first, last and always. If Republicans aren’t, I will stand down until a leader I support comes along. If the GOP “elite” don’t see there are many more like me that won’t take another McCain or Bush, so be it. Sometimes you have to let it burn and rebuild from the ashes.

LarryinLA on May 16, 2014 at 1:08 PM

I can’t even take joy in this, it’s a shame to see conservatives go through what I and others felt when Clinton unmade Glass-Steagall, signed NAFTA, increased punishment in federal drug sentencing and passed welfare reform. Welcome, conservatives, to the land of realizing your party views you with contempt..,

libfreeordie on May 16, 2014 at 1:39 PM

I can’t even take joy in this, it’s a shame to see conservatives go through what I and others felt when Clinton unmade Glass-Steagall, signed NAFTA, increased punishment in federal drug sentencing and passed welfare reform. Welcome, conservatives, to the land of realizing your party views you with contempt..,

libfreeordie on May 16, 2014 at 1:39 PM

Well, at least you realize the Clintons view you with contempt. That’s something.

Most of us here have always known the GOPe loathes us, and we loathe it. We’re not like Democrat fools who think their party leaders love them. “He cares about me!”

fadetogray on May 16, 2014 at 2:10 PM

fadetogray on May 16, 2014 at 2:10 PM

To be fair, Republican politicians have invested decades in making it clear they don’t care about the conservative base or what it thinks. In fact they despise the base, also known as “people who don’t want to do what’s right for America“:

President Bush called the nation’s immigration system “broken” Tuesday, accusing critics of legislation under debate in Congress of not wanting to do what is right for America.

“If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people, or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all so that the people who wear the uniform in this crowd can do the job we expect them to do,” Bush said in Glynco, Ga.”

[...]

“Now’s the time for comprehensive immigration reform. Now’s the time for members of both political parties to stand up and show courage, and take a leadership role and do what’s right for America,” Bush said.”

Etc.

The conservative base needs to be swamped, overwhelmed, blended out and ultimately eliminated as a distinct, identifiable population. (Technically, that’s genocide – the elimination of a distinct national, ethnic, racial or religious group, with or without violence.)

And if they don’t agree that it’s time for them to cease to exist: they “don’t want to do what’s right for America”.

It shouldn’t take genius to figure out that politicians like that don’t love you.

David Blue on May 16, 2014 at 3:52 PM

Allah is just showing that he can rattle the monkey cage at any time and get you all screeching and throwing poop.

They aren’t even worth reading any more – not that anyone reads it before ranting.

Adjoran on May 16, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Don’t you understand what Jake the Goose and V7_Sport have been telling you. We must elect Chamber of Commerce RINOs so they can team with the Dems to stab us in the back.

bw222 on May 16, 2014 at 10:59 AM

What I am saying is simple so you don’t need to mischaracterize it, what I am saying is simply:
Vote for the most conservative electable candidate you can get and then work to keep them accountable.
Don’t want amnesty? Neither do I. What have you done to prevent it? Here are some action steps from an organization that has done a pretty good job of lobbying against illegal immigration.
No one is stabbing conservatives in the back. The liberals and the unions actually employ people to lobby the government on their behalf. The reason conservatives are in the state that they are in is because the left has out strategized, out organized and out worked us. (Work is the most basic element of conservatism and it seems that we have forgotten all about it.) While we are embroiled in the circular firing squad they win by default. While we complain that we don’t have the perfect candidate they go with what they can get and keep pushing for more. We have turned over everything, the media, academia, the press to them and now there are idiots who want to give them the political, uncontested, because all this is hard and it takes time away from b!tching here.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 4:49 PM

Don’t you understand what Jake the Goose and V7_Sport have been telling you. We must elect Chamber of Commerce RINOs so they can team with the Dems to stab us in the back.
bw222 on May 16, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Yes!! Because the illegals will do the jobs Americans will not do. I don’t know about you, but since many Americans will take any job they can get, I never understood this BS argument

Brock Robamney on May 16, 2014 at 11:27 AM

The only job I want you to do is get involved on a substantive level instead of complaining that everything hasn’t been presented to you in a way that’s exactly what you want.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 4:53 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 4:49 PM

We gave them majorities. They did nothing with those majorities for us. Ever seeking to get that elusive progressive ‘middle’ instead. They cannot be held accountable because they can count on our your vote regardless of actually accomplishing anything.
I thought you were linking to their accomplishments. What exactly are those accomplishments? Their front page is filled with failures. All kinds of failures. In fact, the fact that we are even having this conversation at all indicates that failure.
Did we get border enforcement under Bush? Did we get deportation under Bush? Did we even get Bush to stop illegal aliens from getting mortgages from banks underwritten by Fannie Mae and Freddy mac? Just even that tiny little thing? Not letting illegal aliens with no ties to community to get mortgages in this nation?
Did we get any significant increase in energy production in our nation from Bush? Hell, he could not even open up one reserve.

The problem here is that the Republican party is our enemy. Every bit as much our enemy as the Democrat party. The Democrat party gives money to pet big business and to poor people that they take from people like myself. The Republican party gives money to big business and creates poor people for big business to exploit and for Democrats to use to defeat us. Effectively, the only people the party represents is the party.

The party has decided to replace us with mexicans. Your answer to this is to make calls.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 5:11 PM

What? The GOP in the Senate actually listen to the will of the American people and pass something that a majority of the American people and even the rank and file Republicans support? Surely not…after all, they exist only to kiss butt for rightie bloggers who fancy themselves more important and worthy than all of those silly voters out there.

Cheer up Allah, chances are they will not have the guts to do it and then the GOP will lose more ground with not only hispanics but other minorities as well…that way when they lose the next election you can blame the Big Bad Establishment. Again.

There was a time when Hot Air was worth bothering with…no more. Just a big ugly circle jerk.

Terrye on May 16, 2014 at 5:46 PM

What? The GOP in the Senate actually listen to the will of the American people and pass something that a majority of the American people and even the rank and file Republicans support?

Terrye on May 16, 2014 at 5:46 PM

The American people support controlling our borders and enforcing our immigration laws. Liars like you keep telling them that’s part of the deal, and they are so busy with their lives and paying so little attention to politics that they haven’t learned what bold faced liars you guys are.

The only difference between the average American and the average guy commenting on Hot Air is the average American is as ignorant as sin.

Some day they will get informed. It will probably happen when some truly terrible calamity has befallen us. There will be rage across the land, and terrible consequences, and liars like you will wonder where all of the ‘H8′ came from so suddenly out of ‘nowhere.’

fadetogray on May 16, 2014 at 6:14 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 5:11 PM

We gave them majorities. They did nothing with those majorities for us.

Since the GOP has controlled the house none of Obamas society transforming programs has gotten through. They have done what they can with a slight majority in 1/2 of 1/3rd of government.

They cannot be held accountable because they can count on our your vote regardless of actually accomplishing anything.

Chanting that over and over still doesn’t make it my position or right.

I thought you were linking to their accomplishments. What exactly are those accomplishments? Their front page is filled with failures. All kinds of failures. In fact, the fact that we are even having this conversation at all indicates that failure.

Yes, a failure of your brain to comprehend reality. The links are to NumbersUSA, an anti immigration organization that you are too busy with whining here to look into. We’ve had this conversation before.

Did we get border enforcement under Bush? Did we get deportation under Bush Did we even get Bush to stop illegal aliens from getting mortgages from banks underwritten by Fannie Mae and Freddy mac? Just even that tiny little thing? Not letting illegal aliens with no ties to community to get mortgages in this nation?

More BDS, The DEMOCRATS RAN FREDDY/FANNIE. They stopped any reform. Look at the hearings. Bush was lousy on immigration. Now what? Vote for Obama? That’s a stupid solution.

Did we get any significant increase in energy production in our nation from Bush? Hell, he could not even open up one reserve.

Yes, we did, and yes, Bush opened the continental shelf up for oil exploration. Obama closed it.

The problem here is that the Republican party is our enemy. Every bit as much our enemy as the Democrat party.

Going to ad that to the list of stupid things you have written. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama.. there is no equivalent in the GOP. When the GOP fails to live up top their stated goals, that;s a problem. When the democrats do what they tell you they are going to do, that’s a catastrophe. Christ, the democrats are letting convicted felons out BECAUSE they are illegal immigrants. You have a screw lose.

The party has decided to replace us with mexicans. Your answer to this is to make calls.

I’ll take a Mexican with fire in his belly (not the chili pepper variety) over a supposed American who’s solution to every problem is to whine that not enough has been done for him by the efforts of others. Someone who believes that we need to “wreck the dollar and have a civil war”.
“Calls” are not the end of it, but pressure does work on the political process, the other side does it and we(conservatives, not you) don’t. That’s why they win. Still, when we do get off our ass we have stopped Amnesty, twice, stopped cap and trade and prevented Obama from pushing his redistribution plans with a SLIM MAJORITY in 1/2 of 1/3rd of the government.
Get the right proposals out there, and encourage your officials to support them. Make it politically profitable for your legislator to support your views initiatives, and reforms. Voting for the right people is nice, but getting active on issues is better. Call, write, organize, and make your opinions heard.

But that takes work and you are unwilling to do that.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 6:38 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Did we get any significant increase in energy production in our nation from Bush? Hell, he could not even open up one reserve.

Don’t let reality interfere with the perpetual victim trip.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM

Don’t let reality interfere with the perpetual victim trip.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM

Published: July 14, 2008

WASHINGTON — President Bush lifted a presidential moratorium on drilling for oil and natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf on Monday, hoping to prod Congress to act to clear the way for exploration along the country’s coastline in response to soaring energy prices.
Do not let reality interfere with your perpetual stupidity.
WASHINGTON, D.C., November 8, 2011 – After imposing a nearly three-year moratorium on new offshore drilling by discarding the 2010-2015 lease plan that allowed for new development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), the Obama Administration announced a draft plan today that closes the majority of the OCS to new energy production through 2017.
Again, what did we gain?

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 6:53 PM

Don’t let reality interfere with the perpetual victim trip.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 6:42 PM

Published: July 14, 2008

WASHINGTON — President Bush lifted a presidential moratorium on drilling for oil and natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf on Monday, hoping to prod Congress to act to clear the way for exploration along the country’s coastline in response to soaring energy prices.
Do not let reality interfere with your perpetual stupidity.
WASHINGTON, D.C., November 8, 2011 – After imposing a nearly three-year moratorium on new offshore drilling by discarding the 2010-2015 lease plan that allowed for new development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), the Obama Administration announced a draft plan today that closes the majority of the OCS to new energy production through 2017.
Again, what did we gain?

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 6:53 PM

Wow. You really just posted that. What you wrote: “Hell, he could not even open up one reserve.” was wrong. We didn’t gain anything because we elected Obama and he closed off oil exploration in the areas that Bush opened up.
The – words – on – the – screen – have – meaning.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:00 PM

Wow. You really just posted that. What you wrote: “Hell, he could not even open up one reserve.” was wrong. We didn’t gain anything because we elected Obama and he closed off oil exploration in the areas that Bush opened up.
The – words – on – the – screen – have – meaning.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:00 PM

He did not open them up.
I guess you really are stupid.

By itself, the move will have little impact, because Congress enacted a moratorium in 1982 that remains in place. But the step underscores the rising political pressure to address high oil and gasoline prices in the middle of an election year.

No go play with yourself.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 7:03 PM

He did not open them up.
I guess you really are stupid.

Amazing, He opened them by executive order.

By itself, the move will have little impact, because Congress enacted a moratorium in 1982 that remains in place. But the step underscores the rising political pressure to address high oil and gasoline prices in the middle of an election year.

Did you even read the article you are quoting from?
Democrats controlled congress. They have continually blocked oil production in this country since the ‘late ’40s.

No go play with yourself.

Do you ever go back and read some of the stuff you have written here with embarrassment? You have the capacity for embarrassment, right?

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:19 PM

Do you ever go back and read some of the stuff you have written here with embarrassment? You have the capacity for embarrassment, right?

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:19 PM

He did not open them up. They were still closed.
He did it as an election year pander. He did it knowing it was nothing but a symbolic gesture towards retards, LIKE YOU, who are easy bought with shiny worthless items.
Of course they blocked opening them up. That is why I was arguing about 2001 through 2007 when we had a majority in congress that could have accomplished something. But instead of doing something for conservatives they were too busy seeing how much oppressive legislation they could enact.
There is a reason Democrats took control in 2007. Because your style of holding them to account never works, unless you stop voting for them and remind them who they owe their loyalty to they will work for someone else.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 7:25 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 7:25 PM

He did not open them up. They were still closed.

He issued an executive order opening up the continental shelf for oil exploration. You are aware that there is a constitution, right? And that Congress makes the laws, right?

He did it as an election year pander. He did it knowing it was nothing but a symbolic gesture towards retards, LIKE YOU, who are easy bought with shiny worthless items.

Amazing how you can speak for everyone else. Retards? No brain damage here.

Of course they[the democrats] blocked opening them up.

So the democrats were more of an “enemy” than the republicans… Check.

That is why I was arguing about 2001 through 2007 when we had a majority in congress that could have accomplished something.

2 front war and all that,with the democrats doing their best to lose it. Pesky reality.

But instead of doing something for conservatives they were too busy seeing how much oppressive legislation they could enact.

You are a victom! Is that why you spent months putting on a big display about voting for Obama?

There is a reason Democrats took control in 2007.

The wars.

Because your style of holding them to account never works,

As if you ever tried it.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:42 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 7:42 PM

If the congress closed them to oil exploration in 1984 with a law that is still on the books today how did he open them up?
You see, they never opened after 1984. EVER. Not for one millisecond did they open up. Because congress never repealed the law with another bill that a president ever signed.
You know, that whole constitutional thing, where the congress passes a law, the president signs the law and then executes the law. You know that one, right?
So, the outer continental shelf was not open. Thus Bush did not open them. All Bush did was remove a redundant executive order that the First Bush created to keep them closed, because congress in 1990 was planning to open them up. But Bush Sr. did not want our nation to have access to its own oil.

“The time for action is now,” Mr. Bush said as he announced in the White House Rose Garden that he was lifting an executive order, which was first issued by his father in 1990 and was renewed by Bill Clinton.

You see, in reality and under the Constitution of the United States of America, an executive order cannot overturn or repeal a law. Effectively, the only thing that an executive order does is to instruct other parts of the executive branch how to operate. The outer continental shelf was never open once congress passed and President Reagan signed the law.

Again, what did we get for giving them a majority? Pretty much nothing. A short reduction in the speed of the leftward drift of the nation.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 7:54 PM

I’m starting to *not care* how Republicans do in the midterms.

DRayRaven on May 16, 2014 at 8:29 PM

I’m starting to *not care* how Republicans do in the midterms.

DRayRaven on May 16, 2014 at 8:29 PM

If you care about amnesty, apparently you need to want them to lose.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 8:30 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 7:54 PM

If the congress closed them to oil exploration in 1984 with a law that is still on the books today how did he open them up?

With an executive order. You can read about it here.

You see, they never opened after 1984. EVER. Not for one millisecond did they open up. Because congress never repealed the law with another bill that a president ever signed.

Yet that is somehow Bushs’ fault.

So, the outer continental shelf was not open.

Because the democrats blocked action. They were quoted doing so at that link I sent you.

Thus Bush did not open them.

He signed an executive order opening them up. Click on that link and read it.

All Bush did was remove a redundant executive order that the First Bush created to keep them closed, because congress in 1990 was planning to open them up. But Bush Sr. did not want our nation to have access to its own oil.

Back when oil was $11 a barrel, per agreement after the end of the 1st gulf war. Funny how you can see exactly what GHW Bushs’ motives were as well as everyone else’s.

You see, in reality and under the Constitution of the United States of America, an executive order cannot overturn or repeal a law.

That used to be the case before Obama, however, it doesn’t change the fact that he signed the order opening up oil exploration on the continental shelf and Obama rescinded that order almost immediately after taking office. I would sit you down and actually read it to you but I know it wouldn’t do any good at this juncture.

he outer continental shelf was never open once congress passed and President Reagan signed the law.

Reagan another RINO? What would your excuse for voting for Mondale have been? Teach the GOP a lesson about allowing Flock of Seagulls music into the country? What would your excuse for losing to Carter have been?

Again, what did we get for giving them a majority? Pretty much nothing.

You didn’t give them the majority, Reid was in control of the Senate and Pelosi was in control of the house. You don’t understand basic US civics, do you?

A short reduction in the speed of the leftward drift of the nation.

Bush had a 2 front war to fight. I’m sure you would rather have surrendered to the islamists after 9/11 to teach the GOP a lesson or something, but the rest of us have a brain.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 9:22 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 9:22 PM

You really do not understand laws at all do you?An executive order cannot open up drilling in an area where a law forbids it. Thus it was never open. I read the article. It specifically said the executive order does nothing.

Here let me quote it for you again so you might let it sink in.

By itself, the move will have little impact, because Congress enacted a moratorium in 1982 that remains in place. But the step underscores the rising political pressure to address high oil and gasoline prices in the middle of an election year.

See, got that? It was a play to the base that had no ability to deliver anything to the base. He did not deliver.

Here is some more.

Between 2001 and 2007 when we had a majority in the house and a majority for most of the time in the Senate nothing at all happened.

But in 2008 when he had no power to do anything…

Again, you do not even understand law.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 9:39 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 9:26 PM

Here, let this sink in real quick.

GOP senators: We’ll pass immigration reform next year if we take back the Senate

36,000 is a pretty big number, and for the crimes they committed, pretty disgusting.

But we all know that if amnesty does pass the number of people allowed to stay in the United States of America who perpetrate these crimes that are currently in the United States illegally will dwarf that number by two orders of magnitude. While at the same time allowing tens of millions of new third world socialists to chain migrate to perform even more heinous crimes against American citizens over the following decade or two.

If that were not enough, those tens of millions of socialists will vote for Democrats by a margin of 8 to 1. Not really a recipe for any conservative win is it?

But you keep pushing it. I am sure there are some people who will blindly follow your advice. Vote for the Democrat (R) it is better than the Democrat (D) because they are willing to at least tell you sweet lies while they rape you, instead of the evil Democrats who will at least tell you the truth.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 9:45 PM

You just sit here and hit refresh, refresh, refresh, refresh, refresh, refresh, refresh don’t you?

You really do not understand laws at all do you?An executive order cannot open up drilling in an area where a law forbids it. Thus it was never open. I read the article. It specifically said the executive order does nothing.

Which is why Obama rescinded it immediately.

By itself, the move will have little impact, because Congress enacted a moratorium in 1982 that remains in place. But the step underscores the rising political pressure to address high oil and gasoline prices in the middle of an election year.

So does “little impact” mean “non existent?
Here’s more of it:

By itself, the move will have little impact, because Congress enacted a moratorium in 1982 that remains in place. But the step underscores the rising political pressure to address high oil and gasoline prices in the middle of an election year.“Failure to act is unacceptable,” the president said, asserting that obstructionists in the Democratic-controlled Congress have been blocking progress on energy exploration and that “now, Americans are paying at the pump.”
Mr. Bush said some experts believe that drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf could yield a decade’s worth of oil for the United States, and that exploiting it could be done unobtrusively, without damaging coral reefs or creating spills. He said Congress was “the only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources.”
Congressional Republicans, who believe they have been making political headway on the drilling issue, lauded the president’s action, but the immediate reaction from the Democratic leadership was dismissive.
They accused the White House of exploiting the issue for political purposes and said the administration could take steps to accelerate exploration of tracts already available to oil companies if it was serious about boosting domestic production.
“We want oil and gas companies to drill for oil on the leases they have been given,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader.
But Mr. Reid is facing an increasing uneasiness among his own senators who have talked more receptively about increased drilling in recent weeks as a result of public anger over rising gas prices. A bipartisan group of senators is trying to develop a compromise energy plan and the leaders of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee have scheduled a workshop for Thursday for lawmakers and other experts to appear and offer their ideas about how to respond to the climb in oil prices.Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus who was a prominent figure in the White House of President Bill Clinton, called Mr. Bush’s action “a political stunt.”
[…]
The president used the Rose Garden appearance to urge Congress once again to allow exploration for oil and gas in portions of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, in Alaska, and to get behind him in efforts to expand America’s refining capacity. Tapping into currently restricted areas in Alaska could produce “roughly the equivalent of two decades of imported oil from Saudi Arabia,” Mr. Bush asserted.
Senator George Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, said that if drilling had started in the off-limits refuge area “10 years ago, when President Clinton vetoed it, and coupled it with a comprehensive energy plan, we wouldn’t be in this predicament today.” He added: “But now the chickens have come home to roost. We can afford to wait no longer.”
But Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said the president was “deluding the American public into believing that new offshore drilling is a quick fix to $4 per gallon gasoline.” Nothing could be further from the truth, she said.
“Even if new offshore drilling were allowed off the coast of California and along the Outer Continental Shelf — which I wholly and resolutely oppose — it won’t produce oil in time to solve the gas price emergency American consumers are facing right now,” Senator Feinstein said.
Mr. Bush telegraphed his intention during his weekly radio address on Saturday, seeking to put the onus on Democrats who have opposed offshore drilling because of environmental concerns.
“One of the factors driving up high gas prices is that many of our oil deposits here in the United States have been put off-limits for exploration and production,” he said then. “Past efforts to meet the demand for oil by expanding domestic resources have been repeatedly rejected by Democrats in Congress.”

Got it yet? Bush issued an executive order to drill offshore, the democrats rescinded it and blocked action.
Read this sentence out loud to yourself:Bush issued an executive order to drill offshore, the democrats rescinded it and blocked action.
Bush issued an executive order to drill offshore, the democrats rescinded it and blocked action.
GEORGE BUSH ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ALLOW DRILLING FOR OIL ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF OF THE USA AND THE DEMOCRATS BLOCKED ACTION AND RESCINDED IT AS SOON AS THEY GOT THEIR GRUBBY HANDS ON ALL # BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
Say it, say the words.

Between 2001 and 2007 when we had a majority in the house and a majority for most of the time in the Senate nothing at all happened.

And? The price hadn’t spiked until 2008. We were also trying to prop up new government in Iraq which is an oil exporting regieme.

But in 2008 when he had no power to do anything…
Again, you do not even understand law.

Said the person whining that the GOP hasn’t done miracles with a slim majority in 1/2 of 1/3rd of the government.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 10:07 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 9:45 PM

Here, let this sink in real quick.
GOP senators: We’ll pass immigration reform next year if we take back the Senate

Yeah: #1, that’s Allahpundit jiggling his keys for the rage-monkeys, drama queens and dellusional chest thumpers who feel better about themselves whenever they can proclaim that they are finished with the GOP and it’s time to let the country burn.
#2, There’s no mention of what kind of reform they are talking about. Would you be opposed to ANY reform? Building a fence for instance? Probably, because this is all about you.

36,000 is a pretty big number, and for the crimes they committed, pretty disgusting.

Thanks for Obama.

But we all know that if amnesty does pass..

Seeing as everyone who needs to be involved in stopping it is currently letting it burn it probably will. Then you will be able to spin it to the suckers and the rubes that they need to continue voting for democrats to punish the GOP for allowing it to happen when you have been whining that any effort to stop it is useless.

But you keep pushing it. I am sure there are some people who will blindly follow your advice.

You have pushed for letting the country burn, an Obama presidency and civil war. I’ve pushed for fighting back in an organized, sane, effective way.

Vote for the Democrat (R) it is better than the Democrat (D) because they are willing to at least tell you sweet lies while they rape you, instead of the evil Democrats who will at least tell you the truth.

Awesome, the democrats are truth tellers now. Obama has lied and lied… You can’t be this stupid, brain damage or not, the only possible explanation left is that you are an OFA troll.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Problem is, to believe that this might save America you have to also believe that the federal government would recognize the legitimacy of the convention, the legitimacy of these new Constitutional amendments limiting it’s power, and would observe and behave in accordance with the new amendments better than it is observing and behaving in accordance with the Constitution we already have.

They already flout the Constitution and it’s limits – I have no expectation that they’ll suddenly learn a respect for it and *new* limits.

Midas on May 16, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Well then it is time for end of the US then apparently. Because that is the last peaceful means given to the states and the people under the constitution to make a change outside of Washington DC. Otherwise, its war.

NWConservative on May 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Well then it is time for end of the US then apparently. Because that is the last peaceful means given to the states and the people under the constitution to make a change outside of Washington DC. Otherwise, its war.

NWConservative on May 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM

If these people actually believed the paranoia and defeatism that they shovel here they would have packed up and left long ago. They just want to pretend they are in some Red Dawn reboot yelling “wolverines” up in the hills… from the safety of their parents rec-room.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 10:27 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM

You really are stupid.
Bush issued an executive order that had no purpose other than to get rid of another executive order that said that the president does not approve of offshore drilling.

The law of the land. The one that is on the books, since 1984 and still on the books today says that there is a moratorium on drilling offshore. Until that law is repealed or replaced with a different law the President of the United States of America can sign a trillion trillion trillion executive orders to the contrary and it makes no difference, there will be no offshore drilling.

The executive order was pointless and only told the world what the president’s supposed position on offshore drilling is. It made it a public Record. It was to inspire the base. It was pointless and had no effect.

You are being a complete and utter fool, even after being told this THREE TIMES now, you are still completely in thralled to Bush’s removal of a statement about what his position is on offshore drilling just a few scant months before his second full term was up. Think about that while you try to argue that I am stubbornly holding onto a view that is not real. Seriously, think about that.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 10:34 PM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 10:34 PM

You really are stupid.

Original, I call you stupid, you concentrate, rub both IQ points together and come up with the most devastating rebuttal your achey head could cob togeather: You call em stupid.

Bush issued an executive order that had no purpose other than to get rid of another executive order that said that the president does not approve of offshore drilling.

Issued an executive order allowing drilling offshore. We are making progress, you are acknowledging he issued an order on drilling but you still haven’t wrapped your head around it:
GEORGE BUSH ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO ALLOW DRILLING FOR OIL ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF OF THE USA AND THE DEMOCRATS BLOCKED ACTION AND RESCINDED IT. Remember that?

The law of the land. The one that is on the books, since 1984

Because of that RINO Reagan. Check.

and still on the books today says that there is a moratorium on drilling offshore.

Because the democrats wouldn’t cooperate and rescinded the executive order.

Until that law is repealed or replaced with a different law the President of the United States of America can sign a trillion trillion trillion executive orders to the contrary and it makes no difference, there will be no offshore drilling.

Wont happen with the democrats, they wont even allow a pipeline.

The executive order was pointless

Which is why Obama rescinded it within days of taking office.

It was to inspire the base

The GOP base, right? I thought there was no difference between the GOP and the Democrats.

It was pointless and had no effect.

Because the Democrat controlled Senate and House blocked action and Obama rescinded it.

You are being a complete and utter fool, even after being told this THREE TIMES now

I posted the bulk of the story. When you say that there is no difference between the 2 parties you are wrong, you cited this as an example, you were wrong and you don’t have the class to admit it.

you are still completely in thralled to Bush’s removal of a statement about what his position is on offshore drilling just a few scant months before his second full term was up.

I hadn’t thought about it in years. Just when you brought it up to make a false claim.

Think about that while you try to argue that I am stubbornly holding onto a view that is not real.

When you write: “The problem here is that the Republican party is our enemy. Every bit as much our enemy as the Democrat party” and cite Bush not drilling offshore as an example, that’s not reality because the democrats were the ones who blocked drilling.

Seriously, think about that.

I thought about it. You are wrong. There is a difference n parties and the example you cited proves it.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

*me

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 11:12 PM

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

This is fun.
He never opened up the outer continental shelf for oil production. It was not in his power to do so.
He had 7 years and 5 months and a couple weeks up to that point to have made that declaration. It should have been on day one. But the only thing it does is to tell the world the position of the President. The law still needed to be changed to enable it to have any effect. Remember those things, laws.
Thus Bush did nothing.
I can spare a few IQ points to spread around. You on the other hand have used yours all up and are incapable of allowing anything new to penetrate your childhood fortress built in your mine.

Bush was one of the greatest failures as president in modern history. Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama and his father being the only ones I can think of that have been worse than he was.

He failed to wage the two wars we were in competently.
He signed significant progressive legislation passed by a Republican congress.
He oversaw and in fact cheered on the housing bubble.
He started the NSA spying on American Citizens.
He created the TSA which has accomplished nothing for our security but has gone a long ways into granting access to babies’ and geriatrics’ diapers to perverts.
Pushed for and signed TARP.
Refused to zero out TARP so he could hand it over to Obama to abuse.

All in all, I think you are right, Bush was too busy to worry about American energy production, a primary platform of the GOP. He was busy doing laying the groundwork to enable Obama to be as bad as he is.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 11:51 PM

I thought about it. You are wrong. There is a difference n parties and the example you cited proves it.

V7_Sport on May 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

There is a difference.
Election after election the difference gets smaller and smaller.
Election after election the Democrat party moves further and further to the left.
Now put those two statements together and come up with what I just said. Maybe if you are forced to do the work you might actually catch on.
Hint, there is a famous quote out there about the Democrat party which now is completely valid for the Republican party.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 11:58 PM

This is fun.

Only if you have no life.

He never opened up the outer continental shelf for oil production.

He signed an executive order to do so. Had the democrats in congress not blocked it it would have been a done deal.

It was not in his power to do so.

Had congress not blocked it; it would have been, effectively, law. Executive orders effect how a law passed by congress is enforced by the executive branch of government (the presidency). Obama has, for instance, issued 22 executive orders to delay parts of obamacare. They haven’t been opposed by congress because the Senate is in the hands of Harry Reid and the House doesn’t mind delaying a bad bill. These delays in effect become law because Congress or the courts haven’t challenged them. The Democrat controlled congress stopped oil exploration on the continental shelf, Easy enough, they just made it clear that there would be no leases forthcoming and no one was going to risk the money to explore when there was the potential of not getting the lease. Next stop, a puppet show to explain it to you.

He had 7 years and 5 months and a couple weeks up to that point to have made that declaration

When oil was at $11 -25 a barrel. Or when we were trying to rebuild Iraq with a higher oil price.

It should have been on day one.

Had it been done on day 1 with oil at 11-15 it would have been seen as a gratuitous gift to the oil industry and a threat to the environment. You would have found some reason to b!tch about it.
When Bush entered office Gas was $1.45 per gallon. When he left office Gas was around $1.69 a gallon. He proposed offshore drilling during the price spike.

Thus Bush did nothing.

Wrong. Lunatic.

I can spare a few IQ points to spread around. You on the other hand have used yours all up and are incapable of allowing anything new to penetrate your childhood fortress built in your mine.

Awesome psychological projection there, especially when I am forced to explain what an executive order is to you.

Bush was one of the greatest failures as president in modern history. Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama and his father being the only ones I can think of that have been worse than he was.

So Clinton was a big success. Yeah, you are a Moby.

He failed to wage the two wars we were in competently.
He signed significant progressive legislation passed by a Republican congress.
He oversaw and in fact cheered on the housing bubble.
He started the NSA spying on American Citizens.
He created the TSA which has accomplished nothing for our security but has gone a long ways into granting access to babies’ and geriatrics’ diapers to perverts.
Pushed for and signed TARP.
Refused to zero out TARP so he could hand it over to Obama to abuse.

LOL, Pure Kos talking points. You have Bush derangement syndrome.

V7_Sport on May 17, 2014 at 2:35 AM

All in all, I think you are right, Bush was too busy to worry about American energy production, a primary platform of the GOP. He was busy doing laying the groundwork to enable Obama to be as bad as he is.

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 11:51 PM

Was any of this “laying the groundwork” for Obama?

There were at least three other times we had smaller discussions. Maybe you should get a notepad and write this down. If the Republican nominee is Romney, then astonerii and his extended family will be voting for Obama.
astonerii on February 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM

I vote Obama if the only other choice on the ballot is Romney.
astonerii on October 9, 2011 at 8:46 PM

That is why Romney is absolutely unacceptable to me as a Republican president and why I will work against his election if he is the nominee.
astonerii on March 24, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Me, I will convince my 28 member extended family to vote Obama…
You can b!tch and moan all you want about how unfair it is….
astonerii on January 27, 2012 at 6:09 PM

I will never in my life vote for Willard Mitt Romney. I will vote in this election.
astonerii on March 21, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I will vote. It will not be for Willard Mitt Romney. If you cannot live with another 4 years of Obama, pity to you for being such a pathetically weak person.
astonerii on March 21, 2012 at 11:22 PM

I will actively vote against Romney, […] I will not go third party, I will go for the throat and vote direct for Obama.[...] Vote for Obama, vote for the conservative for congress. Got it.
astonerii on February 1, 2012 at 11:26 AM

I would vote Obama just to shut people like you up.
astonerii on November 29, 2011 at 8:20 PM

I see Romney as a bigger long term threat to the nation than Obama.
astonerii on April 5, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I will vote Obama if there is not a solid true conservative with enough backbone to reverse the direction of the nation.
astonerii on April 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM

I vote Obama if Romney is on the ticket. I will not go so far as to send a donation or put a sticker on my bumper, I never put stickers on my bumper, but I will vote.
astonerii on July 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM

I can vote for Obama. This gives the most value. I am young enough to fight in a civil war today and a decade or so more, thus if I vote Obama, and he can bring the collapse of the American dollar and our economy faster than the R, my vote for him gives me value.
astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:47 PM

Yeah, Bush was sub par, I’ll admit. But your judgment of him or anyone else is skewed. You have demonstrated that crystal clear. The Candidate that you have lobbied for tirelessly has doubled the debt, closed drilling, stopped coal power plant production, put the EPA in charge of regulating carbon dioxide, Stopped pipelines from being built, closed a desperately needed refinery, refused to standardize gas formulas… on and on and on. But it’s Bush that you criticize and Obama that you run interference for.

V7_Sport on May 17, 2014 at 2:46 AM

astonerii on May 16, 2014 at 11:58 PM

There is a difference.
Election after election the difference gets smaller and smaller.

That you didn’t see a difference between Romney and Obama is pathetic. Even McCain and Obama was a stark difference.

Election after election the Democrat party moves further and further to the left.

That isn’t the case, however, if conservatives are going to stay home or actually vote for Obama like you tirelessly advocate because you are an OFA troll, then yes, the GOP will move left to go after the moderates and independents and just write off the crazies who are determined to shoot themselves in the foot no matter what.

Now put those two statements together and come up with what I just said. Maybe if you are forced to do the work you might actually catch on.

I’ve painstakingly rebutted everything you have written. The fact that you still spew the same effluence over and over after it has been debunked is proof that you aren’t interested in truth, just pushing an agenda that is harmful to the country. Something you have actually acknowledged.

I can vote for Obama. This gives the most value. I am young enough to fight in a civil war today and a decade or so more, thus if I vote Obama, and he can bring the collapse of the American dollar and our economy faster than the R, my vote for him gives me value.
astonerii on June 17, 2011 at 8:47 PM

V7_Sport on May 17, 2014 at 2:53 AM

V7_Sport seriously thinks the Democrat party is not moving to the left?

LOL. Well, I can just leave it at that.

astonerii on May 17, 2014 at 8:37 AM

They’ll risk a midterm because Latinos won’t be a force in November, but they won’t risk it in a high-turnout campaign with the White House on the line.

AP, evidence shows the the GOP is not inclined to drive high-turnout in presidential elections. It is pandering to Latinos (and liberals generally) that depresses their base.

Even more ironic that the GOP panderers continue to pander when their target audience hates them now and, after passing amnesty for Mexicans, will add an extra dash of disdain for them on their huevos rancheros.

virgo on May 17, 2014 at 12:45 PM

What filibuster? There is no filibuster. A majority rules in the Senate today. Let Obama veto it. There are political risks for Democrats here and none for Republicans since Hispanics vote Demoncrat because they like the welfare checks and Obamacare.

federale86 on May 17, 2014 at 3:08 PM

V7_Sport seriously thinks the Democrat party is not moving to the left?

LOL. Well, I can just leave it at that.

astonerii on May 17, 2014 at 8:37 AM

I misread what I was replying to, strike “That isn’t the case” . Yes, the democrats have moved left.

V7_Sport on May 17, 2014 at 10:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4