Obama is Clueless

nigel...seriously, how you are so clueless at times boggles the mind...and you are not one to talk about precise, let's not remember your embarrassing failure the other

she publicly stated she was for the public option, in the beginning she was in support of the bill....that is precise, that is the truth...it doesn't mean she supports the 'final' bill...she was supportive in the beginning of many of the dems initiatives and goals...just like i said

Of course, you ignore the question. Do you still maintain that Snowe's committee vote shows that she supported the bill?

And Snowe was definitely 100% against the public option:

“I am deeply disappointed with the Majority Leader’s decision to include a public option as the focus of the legislation.

http://snowe.senate.gov/public/inde...a-23ad-4ca5-82d1e7707ce4&Region_id=&Issue_id=
 
From a strictly political perspective if Obama or the Democrats feel immigration is a winning issue (which they may not) they can attempt to pass reform and show the voting public that it is the Republicans that are holding it up/blocking it. Of course if the public is against reform that is probably not a winning tactic. It surely wouldn't be the first time this technique has been tried.

OK, here's my take on it all. Any real work in immigration reform will not hurt the republicans at this time. Their races are going to go well based on the make-up of their constituents. The real harm would be done to democrats who live in conservative states or districts. This, IMO, is the cause for delay. Several of the districts where democrats have won close elections depend on the votes of people who are against anything looking like "amnesty" and they know it. Several of the mid-term races stay within reach of the democrats.....So not before election time.

I am not liking the AZ law altogether, though I understand why they did it. I have nothing against someone wanting to come here and work or live, as long as they jump through the necessary hoops to do so. If they don't and have been under the radar for a time, established families, not been in trouble and such then there needs to be a pathway to citizenship for them without uprooting. This is just my opinion though.
 
this is really beneath you nigel and is honestly a stupid little game you're playing...you keep cherry picking stuff from later when i am talking about in the beginning...from a left wing site so you won't complain:



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-deeran/gop-sen-snowe-shows-suppo_b_206403.html


Actually, I will complain anyway since Snowe never supported the public option as proposed by the Democrats. Remember, the claim that you have yet to find any support for is your assertion that Snowe supported a Democratic bill. Snowe claimed to support a triggered public option that was her own creation and that never was included in any bill proposed by any Democrat.

It's nice to see that you're backing away from the committee vote thing, but you've still got quite a ways to go to support your ridiculous claim that Republicans supported "the h/c bill." None did, with the sole exception of Rep. Cao who later voted against it.
 
who cares, you're splitting hairs on nonsense, it doesn't take away from my claim, you're just spinning like hurricane with no place to go

It most certainly does take away from your claim. If you had wanted to be honest, you'd have included the WHOLE headline, INCLUDING the part added that you conveniently forgot.

You said Reid said he had a handful of names...you've used Snowe twice now, so how hows about you let us have some more.
 
Last edited:
By Ruben Navarrette

SAN DIEGO -- Just in time for Cinco de Mayo -- or as President Obama mistakenly referred to it at a White House reception last year marking the Mexican holiday, "Cinco de Cuatro" -- the chief executive is delivering a clear message to the nation's embattled Latino community: "You're on your own, amigos."

The nicest thing you can say is that Obama is failing to deal with one of the great moral issues of our time: immigration reform. The not-so-nice version is that Obama is subverting the immigration reform cause to get congressional Democrats off the hook in an election year when their prospects are shaky.

Latino Democrats have been telling themselves that the reason Obama broke his campaign promise to work for immigration reform in his first year is because he had a full plate of other issues. They swallowed every disappointment -- when the administration kept up the policy of raiding workplaces, when Obama dedicated just 37 words to immigration in his State of the Union address, when it was revealed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement uses quotas to ratchet up the number of deportations.

In the latest setback, activists are quietly fuming that Obama couldn't summon a stronger word than "misguided" to describe Arizona's racial profiling law -- something for which The New York Times editorial page also took Obama to task.

Why would this surprise anyone? Obama has a poor record on immigration. As a senator, he joined Democratic leader Harry Reid in trying to kill an immigration reform bill with poison pill amendments -- all to please organized labor, which preferred no bill to one with guest workers.
Obama has also been more than willing to play politics with the immigration issue for short-term gain. My theory is that Obama falls into the part of the liberal spectrum that is leery of immigration reform because of concerns that immigrant labor hurts blue-collar workers, especially African-Americans.

Now, a line has been crossed. On Air Force One a few days ago, Obama went from not helping the cause of comprehensive immigration reform to actually hurting it. In a rare visit to the press section of the plane, Obama threw cold water on the prospect of Congress overhauling immigration laws this year -- and in doing so, cut the legs out from underneath immigration reform proponents.
Submitting that "there may not be an appetite" to repair the broken immigration system this year, Obama tried to portray Republicans as the problem. Forget that Democrats run the show at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. Obama claimed that he needs Republican votes to pass immigration reform, and, rather than go it alone with only Democratic support, he's willing to wait for GOP lawmakers.

Good luck. Obama knows full well that the Republicans won't help him cross the street until after November. Besides, where was this insistence on waiting for Republican support when the cause was health care reform? There, the president forged ahead without the GOP.
Mr. President, you picked a fine time to go AWOL. The enactment of the Arizona racial profiling law, which subjects Latinos to second-class treatment and harassment, makes it vital that the White House and Congress take on the immigration issue in order to provide illegal immigrants with a federal cloak of protection against abuses in Arizona.

This looks familiar. Numerous historians have noted that John F. Kennedy was no friend to the civil rights movement early in his presidency because he worried it would torpedo his legislative agenda. He even ordered Attorney General Robert Kennedy to try to convince activists to forgo the freedom rides that challenged Jim Crow laws in the South. It wasn't until May 1963, when television brought into American homes the disturbing images of police dogs and fire hoses being turned on demonstrators in Birmingham, Ala., that Kennedy finally started coming around. On June 11, 1963, the president -- in a national address broadcast on radio and television -- described civil rights as "a moral issue ... as old as the Scriptures and ... as clear as the American Constitution."
Better late than never. For a time, Kennedy was, by virtue of his life experience, clueless when it came to the issue of civil rights. Now Obama is making similar mistakes because he is just as clueless about immigration.

ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com

Hilarious. "The nicest thing you can say is that Obama is failing to deal with one of the great moral issues of our time: immigration reform."

Obama dealt with one of the great moral issues of our time-- health care reform-- and people like you excoriated him for it.

Love the way Navarrette can pick and choose "the great moral issues, etc." to further his point of view.
 
Back
Top