The stupid stuff I read in The Republic editorial pages

The Republic’s Laurie Roberts is either incredibly naive, or she is blindly delusional in support of her beloved GOP. In the past week she has written
Republicans could be the heroes on immigration and Here’s how GOP can get back at Obama on immigration.

Screenshot from 2014-03-18 12:40:34The premise of  her columns is essentially that the GOP can enact meaningful immigration reform, with a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented, and then Latino voters will permanently align themselves with the GOP out of eternal gratitude.

That is a rich fantasy life you live, Ms. Roberts. Ain’t. Gonna. Happen.

It didn’t happen in 1987 after the sainted Ronnie Reagan (in your eyes) gave undocumented immigrants actual amnesty.

The modern-day GOP has evolved into the latest iteration of The Know Nothing Party — virulently nativist, racist, and anti-immigrant. Ronald Reagan would be purged from the modern-day GOP as a RINO (Republican in Name Only).

King2-300x177The modern-day GOP is the party of mass deportations, led by Canadian-born Cuban emigre Sen. Ted “Calgary” Cruz (TX) (“The Castro Express Card, don’t leave home without it“), and Tea Party Reps. Steve “cantaloupe calves” King (IA) and Michele “Minnesota Loon” Bachmann (MN) who authored the House “no compromise” border security bill back in August. The GOP is officially the party of Steve King and of mass deportations:

Passage fell largely along party lines in the 223-189 vote. Only four Republicans voted against the funding measure, while Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas) was the only Democrat to support it.

The four Republican no votes were Reps. Paul Broun (Ga.), Stephen Fincher (Tenn.), Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Walter Jones (N.C.).

Following passage of the border supplemental package, the House approved a second measure in a 216-192 vote that would prevent the Obama administration from expanding the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals (DACA) program. The program provides two-year work permits for undocumented immigrants who arrived to the U.S. as children before 2007.

Eleven Republicans broke ranks and voted against the measure, while 4 Democrats supported it. One member voted present.

[The eleven Republicans who broke ranks to oppose it were Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, Jeff Denham of California, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Mike Coffman of Colorado, David Valadao of California, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, David Reichert of Washington, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Joe Heck of Nevada, Mark Amodei of Nevada, and Fred Upton of Michigan.

The four Democrats who voted “yes” were Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, John Barrow of Georgia, and Nick J. Rahall II of West Virginia.]

UPDATE: The National Journal has a good historical piece on the use of executive orders by presidents dating back to FDR on immigration matters. Critics Say Executive Action on Immigration Would Be Unprecedented. They Forget Their History.

The nativist, racist, anti-immigrant Mass Deportation Republicans include Arizona’s GOP congressional delegation, led by Reps. Matt Salmon and Trent Franks, who are more interested in feeding the conservative media entertainment complex fantasies about impeaching President Obama for doing exactly what their sainted Ronnie Reagan and George H. W. Bush, did during their presidencies without any serious objection from Republicans. Reagan, Bush acted alone to shield potential deportees:

President Obama’s anticipated order that would shield millions of immigrants now living illegally in the U.S. from deportation is not without precedent.

Two of the last three Republican presidents — Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush — did the same thing in extending amnesty to family members who were not covered by the last major overhaul of immigration law in 1986.

There was no political explosion then comparable to the one Republicans are threatening now.

* * *

Nearly three decades ago, there was barely a peep when Reagan and Bush used their authority to extend amnesty to the spouses and minor children of immigrants covered by the 1986 law.

In 1986, Congress and Reagan enacted a sweeping overhaul that gave legal status to up to 3 million immigrants without authorization to be in the country, if they had come to the U.S. before 1982. Spouses and children who could not meet that test did not qualify, which incited protests that the new law was breaking up families.

Early efforts in Congress to amend the law to cover family members failed. In 1987, Reagan’s Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner announced that minor children of parents granted amnesty by the law would get protection from deportation. Spouses and children of couples in which one parent qualified for amnesty but the other did not remained subject to deportation, leading to efforts to amend the 1986 law.

In a parallel to today, the Senate acted in 1989 to broaden legal status to families but the House never took up the bill. Through the INS, Bush advanced a new “family fairness” policy that put in place the Senate measure. Congress passed the policy into law by the end of the year as part of broader immigration legislation.

“It’s a striking parallel,” said Mark Noferi of the pro-immigration American Immigration Council. “Bush Sr. went big at the time. He protected about 40 percent of the unauthorized population. Back then that was up to 1.5 million. Today that would be about 5 million.”

The Arizona Republic today allowed the always disingenuous Salmon and Franks to make this utterly ridiculous argument. Congressmen: Why we must stop Obama:

Some have argued that executive action would be the compassionate thing to do. Far from it: Most agree that executive action on immigration is a poison pill.

Even comprehensive immigration reform’s most ardent advocates, including Sen. John McCain, have warned that any executive action on immigration would be detrimental to future efforts to improve current policies. This action will successfully ruin the chance of addressing even the most basic problems with our system.

Rubber-GlueThis pair of geniuses (sic) did that when they voted for the mass deportations “no compromise” border security bill drafted by Reps. King and Bachmann in August. The House GOP “poisoned” the well on immigration when the TanMan, Weeper of the House John Boehner, reneged on his promise and refused to allow the bipartisan Senate Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill to even come up for a vote in the House.

Republicans are doing what they always do: engage in projection, casting fault on others for doing what they are doing.

Remember, on Inauguration Day in 2009, the Republican leadership — including then Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ) — got together and conspired to block every legislative proposal by President Obama. Robert Draper Book: GOP’s Anti-Obama Campaign Started Night Of Inauguration (Robert Draper’s book, “Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives.”) This strategy of obstruction has not changed.

The GOP continues to block the president’s legislative proposals, and seeks to repeal any legislation successfully enacted by President Obama and the Democratic Congress. There is no intention to negotiate with the president in good faith. There never has been. So let’s stop pretending that the GOP will behave as a responsible governing party. The GOP has no such intention, and is fundamentally incapable of doing so.

UPDATE: The GOP is not dealing in good faith when the whole point of this exercise is to feed the impeachment fantasies of the conservative media entertainment complex. Rep. Matt Salmon  said last week, Immigration Executive Action An Impeachable Offense (Um, no, it is not):

Republican Rep. Matt Salmon of Arizona said today he believes unilateral executive action taken by the president to slow deportations of undocumented immigrants would be an impeachable offense.

“Well Charles Krauthammer was asked that same question and I think, just recently on one of the news programs and I have to agree with him of course it would be,” Salmon said on America’s Forum.

He acknowledged, however, that the impeachment process would be politically difficult.

“But committing an impeachable offense and getting, ya know, the two-thirds in the Senate to convict are two different stories,” he said. “So, I mean, we have to play the hand that we are dealt right now.”

Not the brightest bulb in the marquee.

8 responses to “The stupid stuff I read in The Republic editorial pages

  1. Actually, it’s cantaloupe calves, not thighs. Not substantively important, but if you want to use it in the future, and I’m sure you’ll have plenty of opportunities, cantaloupe calves sounds better anyway.

  2. captain*arizona

    The republican party told people on access that they would not fund their medical treatments a couple of years ago and people died without that treatment. Tax breaks for corporations and rich people was more important then peoples lives. This is laurie roberts arizona republican party ;but she is a “good” republican just like the “good ” germans who didn’t support what the nazi were doing.

  3. Laurie Roberts

    My suggested compromise was pathway to citizenship for DREAMERSrs and pathway to legalization for their parents. I also never said the GOP would do it, just that they should if they want any shot at all in 2016 and beyond. Naive? maybe. A fantasy? Probably. But from a strategic point of view, I bet it would work.

    • Laurie, there is nothing you could say to this group that would matter. You are not a far left nut job, so you are automatically wrong. Especially in the eyes of this particular blogger.

    • So this is an “aspirational” goal for a political party that does not actually exist in reality. I didn’t know that you write fiction.

  4. captain*arizona

    Republicans telling minorities hispanics blacks asians native americans gays and single moms they shouldn’t support the democratic party is like a nazi telling jewish people they shouldn’t support the allies. Or a klansman telling black people they shouldn’t support the naacp.

  5. Donna Gratehouse

    Gotta love the double standard where when Democrats do things to help people they’re derided as “handouts” to bribe people to vote for them but when Republicans deign to act humane toward any group of poor people it’s “heroic”. Reminds me of the AZ Medicaid expansion when Laurie Roberts and other pundits slobbered all over the GOP lawmakers who broke with their party to vote for it and demanded that liberals thank them for it effusively. Meanwhile every single Dem in the lege voted for it with no cajoling required.