Posted on 02/27/2014 1:49:19 PM PST by SeekAndFind
I’m officially nervous but I’m not sure why. Boehner’s been doing this two-step, talking up immigration reform to reassure amnesty fans that it’s on his radar and then downplaying it to reassure conservatives, for years now. Maybe it’s the fact that he and The One huddled about it in a private White House meeting? Sounds important! Whether it really was or not.
Maybe they were merely sharing a laugh over Pelosi’s “discharge petition” idea, a cheap and easy way to make it look to amnesty supporters like Democrats are driving a hard bargain before they inevitably end up voting for whatever Boehner brings to the floor.
At his weekly news conference today, Boehner was asked what he and the president agreed on the most.
“Immigration,” Boehner said. “We had a very healthy conversation on immigration.”
When asked to elaborate, Boehner gave a long pause and finally said: “You asked a question and I gave you the answer.”…
Boehner could have taken the easy way out of the question by saying that he and the president agreed on supporting the troops, or something similarly general. But he decided to say immigration. And inside the Beltway, one word often speaks volumes.
Relatedly, here’s something I read a few days ago about why so many establishment Republicans wanted Jan Brewer to veto Arizona’s religious freedom bill:
If Brewer signs the legislation, the major concern of party strategists is that opponents would launch an effort to overturn it. A referendum in November would allow the debate about whether denying services to gays is discriminatory to simmer through November, drawing global attention and increasing turnout among younger, liberal voters.
No speedbumps before the midterms. That’s the argument that’s been deployed every time the congressional GOP faces a thorny issue, like the latest debt-ceiling hike. We’re on a glide path to taking back the Senate thanks to ObamaCare’s endless pratfalls, the theory goes. Why on earth would the party jeopardize that by taking a stand on anything contentious right now? You’ll hear that logic again and again from the leadership over the next eight months — except on one issue. Can you guess what it is?
Meanwhile, behold the latest numbers from Pew on immigration reform. See now why the GOP leadership keeps talking up legalization but adamantly refuses to consider a special path to citizenship? They can sell legalization to every demographic — tea partiers included — but support starts to break down once you start asking about ultimate legal status:
That poll’s flawed insofar as it doesn’t specify “citizenship through existing channels,” i.e. the House leadership’s position, as an option but it’s still useful in showing why Democrats should and probably will take whatever Boehner offers them. There’s a public consensus right now on legalization; citizenship will inevitably follow, consensus or not, but demanding it upfront as a condition of reform could blow up the whole thing. Obama’s (and Pelosi’s) task is to convince Democrats to take half a loaf now in full assurance that they’ll get the other half later. Is The One so badly weakened that he can’t even manage a messaging job like that within his own party? Maybe that’s what he and Boehner talked about yesterday.
Exit quotation from Ted Cruz: “If the House went down the road of passing a majority amnesty plan, I think that could screw up the election. I think the odds of Harry Reid remaining majority leader would jump tenfold.”
No excrement, Benedict! Bob
Baaarrrrrfffffff.
Boner is like a sinking man who gets tossed an anvil and thanks the tosser.
What a gutless idiot.
prediction: RATS AGREE to stronger borders, then after law is passed...they do all they can to ignore the law like today and the country goes to *hit...
Of course you do, Republican suicide
Isn’t Boehner running for reelection?
Any chance he’ll be primaried? Or do we have to hope he won’t be reappointed as SOH? (assuming we keep control of the House)
No surprise that a butthead and a bonehead would agree, I mean they are on the same team.
Soooo,
Did you “monica Lewinski” the mooselimb poser there Juan?
Like it seems you usually do?
Remember folks. FR’s loud and proud GOPe wing says they will vote GOPe “No Matter What”.
So that includes when the GOPe openly sides with Obama. Yes, it does. Can’t have it both ways.
So logic shows that they are no better than any other Democrat. And should be treated as such.
No amnesty for illegals.
Secure the border and then deal with immigration.
FIRE BONEHEAD, NOW!
Something is seriously not right, with this man.
As Rick Perry would say, “Adios, mo....”
I voted for my last RINO/GOPe with Mitt Romney. Never again!
They want to destroy our nation, they can do it without me. I’ve grabbed the ankles for the last time!
Considering we crossed swords over the issue of Romney I’m glad you had a change of heart.
Establishment Republicans like John Boehner depend on corporate donations to win their elections, and corporations want as much immigration as possible, legal or otherwise, to keep down the price of labor.
So no wonder John Boehner is saying positive things about immigration at this crucial time of soliciting donations in the election cycle.
However, the majority of Republican voters don’t want immigration, precisely because they don’t want the price of their own and other Americans’ labor to be held down.
With the growth of the Tea Party and other Conservative groups, Conservative candidates who are on the side of their voters in opposing immigration will have more funds available this year to counter their corporate-sponsored Establishment-Republican opponents in the Republican primaries.
That’s why Mitch McConnell and his fellow RINOs are being overtaken in the polls by their Conservative opponents. If they vote for amnesty to please their corporate donors, they’ll fall even further behind. So let’s hope they do, but that amnesty doesn’t pass.
Boehner and Cantor need to hold a press conference.
“We tried our best, but the Republican Party is a party of evil Nativists and Uncle Tom’s and they are too dominant in our caucus.”
Keep in mind when Obama talks about Dreamers he acts as if they are all valedictorians not knuckleheads. Some of his wording sounds good on “talented young people”.
Indeed we did.
The divisions that the 2012 presidential had here on FR (and amongst conservatives in general) were profound.
Mitt Romney was my last choice, but when he got the nomination, I thought, well, he's better than Obama. I sent his campaign several donations, and tried to convince others that he was better than Obama.
Mitt Romney paid back my loyalty (and the loyalty of others) by never challenging Obama on an ideological basis. The point where I lost all respect for Romney, was during the last debate; HE NEVER EVEN CHALLENGED OBAMA ON BEGHAZI!! WTF!
In retrospect, you folks who were skeptical of Romney were correct in there not being much difference between the GOPe/RINO class and Democrats. I think it's safe to say, if Romney had won, he more than likely would've slowly morphed into the spineless mess we call Speaker Boehner.
I will never, ever go out on the limb for another POS RINO!
AMEN SISTER!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
