For all his rhetoric regarding coming together, the man is constantly looking for a fight, and will create one if necessary. He flew across the country to Las Vegas and then back to make yet another campaign speech Tuesday
(NY Times) Speaking at a high school here in a state that has seen rapid growth in its Hispanic population, the president praised a bipartisan group of senators who proposed their own sweeping immigration overhaul a day earlier, saying their plan was very much in line with his own proposals.
Mr. Obama warned, however, that “the closer we get, the more emotional this debate is going to become.†He said that if Congress did not move forward “in a timely fashion†on its own legislation, he would send up a specific measure — something the White House has put off for now — and demand a vote.
The president’s speech immediately exposed potential fault lines in the coming debate. He said, for example, that there must be a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants “from the outset,†a statement that would seem at odds with the assertion by some senators that citizenship must be tied to tighter border security.
Obama gives lip service to border security in his own outline, but wants no part of actually and truly securing the border before a blanket amnesty occurs (which doesn’t make all those who have come to this country legally, have done everything required of them, and are still waiting, particularly happy). This will end up the same way everything else ends up: there will be some conflict, some infighting, but things are still slowly getting done, then Obama will jump in, create massive strife, start casting blame and insulting people, and will create hard feelings.
He even attempted to do his typical strife during the speech, as The Other McCain points out
“Most of ‘us’ used to be ‘them,'” Obama said. “Unless you were one of the first Americans — a Native American — you came from someplace else,” he added, listing off waves of immigrants. “All of those folks — before they were ‘us,’ they were ‘them.'”
That quote appeared at Buzzfeed, which notes
Obama’s proposal, laid out in a fact sheet distributed by the White House, differs in two ways from the congressional one: it treats same-sex couples the same way as straight couples, and doesn’t include a “trigger mechanism” to make reform contingent on stricter border security efforts. Both are potential deal-breakers with congressional Republicans, though neither earned a direct mention from Obama in his remarks.
“Unless there’s real enforcement triggers, we’re not going to have a bill that moves on,” Republican Sen. Marco Rubio said Tuesday in an interview with radio host Rush Limbaugh.
“Any solution should be a bipartisan one, and we hope the President is careful not to drag the debate to the left and ultimately disrupt the difficult work that is ahead in the House and Senate,” warned Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Speaker of the House John Boehner.
Without real enforcement measures, the legislation may barely pass the Senate, if it even makes it to the floor, but will fail big time in the House. Of course, when this progresses beyond the “framework” phase and moves towards actually crafting legislation, we can, and should, expect Obama to jump in and cause problems. It’s just the way this divisive community agitator operates.
Putz says – “Most of ‘us’ used to be ‘them,’†Obama said. “Unless you were one of the first Americans — a Native American — you came from someplace else,†he added, listing off waves of immigrants. “All of those folks — before they were ‘us,’ they were ‘them.’â€
If one follow’s the Putz’s logic …, the vast majority of Latinos coming to this country are either of native American Indian ancestory or they are half-breeds from Central and South America, who were neither “them”, nor “us”, and who were, in fact, savages living in the Stone Age before white men civilized the Americas, and who continued to live in squalor of their of their own making for generations, and,because they don’t know any better, they are now turning this country into a shithole just like the one that they came from, and with the help of Liberals who hate this country, blaming “us” for the fact that they are such creeps, losers, misfits, parasites and perverts more vile than any savages.
I’m for sending all of them back to wherever they and/or their parents came from.
What do they contribute? Nothing. Absolutely nothing that we can’t do without. (That applies to Liberals, too. All of them are useless.)
[…] Obama’s Itching For A Fight On Illegal Immigrants […]
Thanks for being so openly racist, many try to hide their true feelings. Your ideas about these “savages” could have been lifted word for word by what the English said about my people, the Irish. Does NINA mean anything to you? it does to me.
What did I say that isn’t true?
Preposterous. Why do I suspect that the English didn’t dislike the Irish, collectively, but rather they just disliked your obnoxious direct ancestors?
Calling me a racist wasn’t a valid argument. It just shows that, in your frustration and desperation when you couldn’t come up with a rational or even marginally legitimate or credible argument, much less even a cogent thought, you resorted to an ad hominem attack, attacking the messenger, since you couldn’t attack the message, and thereby conceding that you just lost the argument – big time.
Poor baby. Boo hoo. You could whine that you have the flu?
I feel badly. Double-teaming this particular Liberal isn’t fair. He is so lame that, even one-on-one, is what it must be like to roll drunks or to take candy away from babies.
Yeah, I’m sure that it does have some obscure meaning to you.
It couldn’t be Nina as in the Nina, the Pinta and the Santa Maria, could it? If so, wtf is the relevance?
But hey, don’t keep me in suspense.