Posted on 12/02/2014 5:39:38 PM PST by Kaslin
After this, the word “colloquially” should be added to the definition of “Kinsleyan gaffe” — i.e. when a politician accidentally tells the truth … colloquially. That’s what Obama did last week when he shooed away a heckler by casually reassuring him that he had changed the law on immigration — which was true. With Congress unwilling to impeach and the next president unlikely for political reasons to cancel Obama’s order, his amnesty will survive as the de facto law of the land until either conservatives win the White House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate or the two parties pass a terrible comprehensive immigration reform bill. If O’s order hadn’t effectively changed the law for millions of people, Latinos wouldn’t be so excited about it. But lackeys like Josh Earnest here and Jeh Johnson can’t say that. They need to spin this as an application of the law, not a change to it, for the simple reason that only in a banana republic does the president actually set broad national policy without the legislature’s approval. And certainly, certainly we don’t live in one of those.
There’s an obvious follow-up question for Earnest that goes unspoken: What about the change made by this order to the way the executive branch operates constitutionally? O’s immigration policy might disappear in time — as noted, a Republican wave might wash it away or a bipartisan deal might supersede it. The fact that Obama’s set this precedent for bold action, though, won’t escape the attention of his successors. So long as the demographics of midterm congressional elections continue to favor the GOP, future Democratic presidents will be eager to exploit executive action to avoid Congress and implement their agenda. And Republican presidents will be tempted by the fact that liberals, in blessing Obama’s power grab, will have no ground to stand on if/when conservatives try one of their own in some other policy area. A change in “the law,” by which we mean statutory law on immigration, is actually the venial sin here. The mortal sin is the change made to constitutional law in blurring the separation of powers. Until Congress figures out a way to challenge the president that won’t blow up in their faces politically, we’re stuck with that one.
Josh Earnest says Obama was "speaking colloquially" when he said he changed immigration law
Obama’s Clarification Team took a long time to come up with , colloquially,LOL,they’re running on empty
F him.
Why do we even care what the jello-spined cowards in Versailles on the Potomac do,think or say? They have as much relevance to our lives as the latest mindless bimbo antic or who’s sleeping with who. We only ALLOW them to be relevant.
Pay no attention to anything they do, think or say. Ignore them and live as if they don’t exist. What of the rules and taxes they impose, you ask? F them. RESIST. Go Galt.
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
It's a squirrel having an informal conversation with 220 volts.
What you said
Colloquially! Today’s WH euphemism for “lied his arse off.”
colloquially”...speaking “
Channeling his inner Biden
A Conservative President wouldn’t need a philibuster proof senate in order to reverse this order and go full bore in removing illegals from the country. It only takes the will to do so.
They like to pee on our legs — and tell us it’s raining.
A Conservative President wouldn’t need a philibuster proof senate in order to reverse this order and go full bore in removing illegals from the country. It only takes the will to do so.
It sounded damn near Austrian to me.
It sounded damn near Austrian to me.
Ebonics
Of course, having 'ground to stand on' makes absolutely no difference to liberals. They do WHAT they want, WHEN they want. And Republicans HELP them.
Speaking “colloquially”
1) Why did’nt slick Willy Clinton think of that???
2) I hope Cosby is taking notes, he could use these moves to defend himself
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.
