Posted on 06/15/2012 8:14:40 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Okay, maybe that wasn’t the best metaphor, but he fumbled an important opportunity. The problem with the president’s amnesty decree is not that it “makes it more difficult to reach that long-term solution because an executive order is, of course, just a short-term matter — it can be reversed by subsequent presidents.” The problem is that it’s u-n-c-o-n-s-t-i-t-u-t-i-o-n-a-l. You would expect Allen West and Steve King to be forceful in denouncing this usurpation, but even Amnesty John McCain and Rick “you don’t have a heart” Perry were strong. Heck, Lindsey Graham — Lindsey Graham — denounced the move as “possibly illegal.” And the fact that Romney didn’t answer when asked if he’d reverse the order is an especially bad sign.
I know all those who’ve been accusing me of being in the tank for Romney will say “I told you so,” but my distress isn’t really about his views on the policy issue at hand — he seemed to endorse Rubio’s as-yet-not-introduced revision of the DREAM Act, which I’m pretty sure I won’t like. I’m appalled because this is a fundamental matter of our political order
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
LLS
As much as I don’t like it..Bambi made a good statregic move.
Was it illegal? You darn skippy it was.
On the news tonight they showed lots of Latinos sobbing in relief and praising The Won. These people could give less than a huge flying duck if it was against OUR Constitution. I saw that after I posted my original comment.
I hope that Myth figures a way out of this. Isn’t some CongressCritter suing the admin?
HER response was the response of a PATRIOT CONSERVATIVE and she had the response that mitt romney should have responded with... 10 minutes after barrack kardashian’s speech.
LLS
Better yet, what would Reagan do!
according to YouTube clip, Reagan says he believes in the idea of amnesty.
How about Romney state that he believes in a comprehensive review of our immigration policy towards the Mexicans, because that’s what we are talking about, and then come up with some suggestions. Because, the sooner we get this resolved, the sooner the brown catholic bretheren to the south will help shore up or Judeo Christian believes and national security versus accommodating non traditional influences out of fear of appearing religiously intolerate.
Being the former governor of California, I think he would be more comfortable visiting a catholic Hispanic household versus a socialist atheist household. No doubt a work and living visa needs to be clarified and scrutinized. But what do we do with the 14 million illegally here? That is the question.
Reagan believed in amnesty with a hell of a lot of controls, if you listen to his ytube and all his follow-up legislation attempts you can see this.
I agree.
No doubt her response was excellent.
Just as yours and mine are. But you and I and Sarah are not running for president.
I don’t know about you, but I am no politician.:)
Yep, Sarah Palin was stopped by of all people Politico and asked off the stage about Obama’s unconstitutional grab and she responded clearly and concise that does not needed to be handled by staffers and advisors unlike people around here making excuses for Mitt not being prepared for a response:
“Our president still doesn’t understand the three branches of government,” she said. “He thinks he can usurp the Congressional branch of our government and dictate and mandate a policy like this.”
She took umbrage about an explanation she read in the press that said the law would only affect “law-abiding illegal immigrants.”
“That is a contradiction right there,” she said in the interview. “I think we need to characterize it and describe it more accurately. It’s called illegal for a reason.”
I don’t know enough about immigration law to make an informed decision, but I suspect most legislators never contemplated a president who would use emergency and/or discretion clauses to such an extent. So maybe immigration law does give the president the authority to amnesty hard immigration cases. The people who wrote that probably did not imagine a president like Obama would come along and use every conceivable loophole for political purposes.
That said, I know the difference between following the spirit of a law and the law itself. Legalists love to do the same thing with scripture. If Christ didn’t specifically state, “For the record, I oppose abortion,” then legalists can (and DO!) say Christ is OK with abortion. But we know immigration law was never intended to permit this, and even if it’s legally OK, we aren’t dummies. We know Congress has been try to reach a democratic compromise on this. They would have certainly passed something had there been a true mandate from We the People to do so.
I guess the emperor grew impatient when he wasn’t playing golf.
LLS
LLS
GOD bless Sarah... I will battle throught the gates of hell and back with her... she has but to ask! GOD bless her and people like you who recognize the truth!
LLS
GOD bless Sarah... I will battle through the gates of hell and back with her... she has but to ask! GOD bless her and people like you who recognize the truth!
LLS
GOD bless Sarah... I will battle through the gates of hell and back with her... she has but to ask! GOD bless her and people like you who recognize the truth!
LLS
I don’t think Mitt is smart ...or a statesman. But today, he is what we have. :(
Maybe his “people” can fix this particular situation, at the right time.
And...Thank goodness we aren’t politicians!!
As the title says, Mitt screwed the pooch with his clueless, pandering comment today. All eyes on the right have suddenly turned to him, and lots of them now have raised eyebrows.
He'd better get in front of the citizen outrage in a hurry, and demand that Obama cancel the E.O., or demand that Congress begin impeachment hearings.
At the very least, he's got to immediately begin echoing the right on this. Obama just shredded the law and the Constitution with this illegal act, and he's got to say that. Repeatedly, and with passion (well, at least as much as he can muster without mussing his hair).
My personal expectations run quite low about him doing what he needs to do.
Off message? His 'message' is supposed to reflect his accord with a majority of the American people, our traditions, laws, and Constitution.
It's also supposed to be responsive to unfolding events. People need to see leadership, and there's no better way to do that when challenging an incumbent president, than a crack-fire, correct response to his missteps and blunders.
Romney was crack-fire, alright, but with precisely the WRONG response.
It's an election year and Obama detected this Republican fault line and decided to use it against them. Like Birth Control mandate I expect Republicans will stop talking about this very soon, Just the customary ‘woof woof’
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.