Backlash to immigration starting to be felt - Latino community insulted at being used as obvious political props

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 1:22 AM GMT
    After Obama's evolution on gay marriage, many believed the action was politically based and he was forced into it by Biden's remark. Similarly, the impression is starting to come out that this move was completely political, driven by pressure from former New Mexico Gov Gary Johnson and need to get the jump on Rubio so Obama could get credit from the Latinos. Problem for Obama, his pattern is obvious and the Latinos are not stupid. When people believe he acts purely for political reasons, his desired benefit is significantly reduced and he diminishes the office.

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/18/the-reason-obama-reversed-course-on-immigration/2/

    The reason Obama reversed course on immigration

    By Robert G. de Posada - Former President, The Latino Coalition

    During the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama promised to pass a comprehensive immigration reform law within a year of his inauguration. Convinced by that promise, Latinos voted for Obama in droves. Almost four years later, President Obama has not only failed to deliver on that promise, he has managed to undermine even the smallest of reform efforts and has taken credit for deporting more immigrants than any other president in U.S. history. He has also consistently condemned critics who have urged him to use his executive authority to address the immigration issue, arguing that he does not have such authority.

    That was, of course, until last week, when President Obama resorted to one of the most desperate acts of political pandering from a sitting president in recent memory.

    So what caused the president to reverse course on immigration three and a half years into his term?

    On June 7th, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee, delivered an address to the National Puerto Rican Coalition in Washington, D.C. In his address, Johnson issued some bold immigration proposals and criticized President Obama for not addressing immigration issues. Johnson specifically criticized the president for deferring deportation but not offering work permits to the people he defers, leaving these individuals in a complicated state of limbo.

    A little more than a week after Johnson’s proposals were circulated among Latino leaders, President Obama reversed course. It seems likely that Johnson forced the president’s hand. After all, President Obama couldn’t afford to have his record on immigration challenged from the left. The Obama campaign is well aware that, although the president leads Romney in most polls, a low Latino turnout and a strong challenge from Governor Johnson on immigration could doom his re-election chances in key states where strong Latino voter support will be essential.

    It’s certainly not the case that the administration was unaware of its administrative options until recently. The administration has been fully aware of those options for two years. An 11-page memo, drafted by Chief of Policy and Strategy for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Denise Vanison in July 2010, outlined the various ways the administration could use existing regulations to provide relief to many of the nation’s 11-18 million illegal immigrants.

    During the first two years of his administration, Obama had supermajorities in both the House and the Senate, but he never pressured Congress to address immigration reform. In contrast, President Bush assigned two of his top cabinet secretaries to work with congressional leaders in drafting comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Obama never assigned the issue to anyone. Even when the “DREAM Act” was brought up for a vote in the Senate, there was no real lobbying effort to get moderate Democrats on board, which would have been enough to pass the bill in the Senate.

    Obama’s supporters say that something is better than nothing and that late is better than never. But the fact is that this issue clearly demonstrates that President Obama couldn’t care less about immigration reform, and only took this action because he was afraid of the political consequences of not acting.

    If he truly believed that this was “the right thing to do,” why would he have waited three and a half years to do it? Does he realize that he may have deported tens of thousands of young immigrants who would now be covered by this action? Does Obama understand that for three and a half years he played politics with the lives of these youngsters and forced them to live in the shadows?

    Sadly, given Obama’s history of taking an all-talk-and-no-action approach to comprehensive immigration reform, his actions will likely end here — proving that he just needed one big press conference to wave in front of Latinos before the November election. Unless he is willing to apply these same standards for deferred action and work permits to the illegal parents of U.S. citizens and willing to grant eligibility for green cards to those who have qualified under Temporary Protective Status (TPS), which he can do unilaterally using the same standards as he did on this move, there is little reason to believe that this is anything more than an effort to use millions of human beings as campaign props.

    Now is the time for Latino voters to debate whether President Obama deserves our continued support in November. One has to wonder what he is more committed to: securing his re-election or keeping the promises he made to the Latino community to address one of the most important issues affecting our nation.

    Robert G. de Posada is the founder and former president of The Latino Coalition and the president of Latinos for Reform.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 3:16 AM GMT
    I'm not offended.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jun 19, 2012 3:31 AM GMT
    From "The Daily Caller ?!"

    LOL.

    You cut and pasted an opinion piece from a radical right wing Republican propaganda rag.

    And, you tried to pass it off as fact.

    You're pathetic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 8:16 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidFrom "The Daily Caller ?!"

    LOL.

    You cut and pasted an opinion piece from a radical right wing Republican propaganda rag.

    And, you tried to pass it off as fact.

    You're pathetic.

    Doesn't matter what site it was on. It was from a Latino leader. But thanks for bumping the thread. LOL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 8:49 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidFrom "The Daily Caller ?!"

    LOL.

    You cut and pasted an opinion piece from a radical right wing Republican propaganda rag.

    And, you tried to pass it off as fact.

    You're pathetic.


    But the left do it all the time here!

    Why the hypocrisy?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 11:04 AM GMT
    Marco Rubio said on Hannity that he had been working with both Democrats and Republicans on something similar to what Obama announced. McCain had also supported measures but both were never contacted by Obama to work jointly. Seems clear Obama feared Rubio getting credit so Obama's move was a preemptive strike in a disparate attempt at creating a wedge issue, and make more difficult getting something through legally.

    More people are analyzing and seeing his divisive tactics for what they are.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 11:41 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidMarco Rubio said on Hannity that he had been working with both Democrats and Republicans on something similar to what Obama announced. McCain had also supported measures but both were never contacted by Obama to work jointly. Seems clear Obama feared Rubio getting credit so Obama's move was a preemptive strike in a disparate attempt at creating a wedge issue, and make more difficult getting something through legally.

    More people are analyzing and seeing his divisive tactics for what they are.


    Nope. That's just happening in your right-wing parallel universe.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 12:07 PM GMT
    Lol, if it's such a wedge issue, it would be easy for the Republicans to submit a bill now and make it a non-issue, no?

    Rubio has been floating the same ideas for some months now and never submitted a bill. Talking on cable TV doesn't constitute "working with Republicans and Democrats." And now he's given up altogether.
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2458844

    Oh wait...there's been a version of DREAM since 2001 (introduced by Orrin Hatch then and again in 2003) and the last attempt at passing a more stringent version of DREAM was passed by the House and filibustered in the Senate by the Republicans (including Orrin Hatch) in 2010.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/dreaming-of-bipartisanship/2012/06/18/gJQARmlwlV_blog.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 12:41 PM GMT
    Just more pandering from Obama in the months before the election. Nothing new.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jun 19, 2012 12:44 PM GMT
    Nice try, I don't think there is any "backlash" from Hispanics at this point, more
    wishful thinking. I'd pick up whether there was a real backlash....other than the usual repub antics during an election year.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 1:04 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidOh wait...there's been a version of DREAM since 2001 (introduced by Orrin Hatch then and again in 2003) and the last attempt at passing a more stringent version of DREAM was passed by the House and filibustered in the Senate by the Republicans (including Orrin Hatch) in 2010.

    The irony of the DREAM Act's failure is that it had strong bipartisan support at the start of the administration, and advocates thought it could generate momentum for more policy changes.

    But as the country's mood shifted on illegal immigration, support among Republicans and some Democratic senators evaporated, with many decrying it as a backdoor amnesty for lawbreakers.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/18/AR2010121803271.html

    Fact is there had been bi-partisan support, but the DREAM Act was much more. There could have been bipartisan action, but according to Sen Rubio, the White House had been attempting to divide even Hispanics against Hispanics in this issue. Following link is Rubio on Hannity. Also will be on for more in depth discussions of his own background on Friday.

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/index.html#/v/1696001414001/rubio-the-president-ignored-the-constitution/?playlist_id=86924
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 1:16 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidMarco Rubio said on Hannity that he had been working with both Democrats and Republicans on something similar to what Obama announced.
    Bullshit.. you stay in Calif and hear what you want to hear.. I'll stay in here in Fl and hear EXACTLY what Rubio "says".. mmmk?
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jun 19, 2012 2:36 PM GMT
    Living in Arizona, obviously I know, and work with, many hispanics --- some who immigrated here, others whose families have been here for generations. Not all are pro-Obama or Democrats. Also, I was watching an interesting local news show here the day after Obama's immigration policy change. They were interviewing different hispanics around town -- some were laborers, others professional types, others just people they stopped on the street -- and the general feeling I got from watching was that the "immigration" issue was important to many, but not of utmost importance to most. I think just like to many gays, gay issues are not the prevailing motivation to vote one way or the other --- same goes with hispanics. They cannot be bought, and they know when someone is trying to do that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 2:38 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidLiving in Arizona, obviously I know, and work with, many hispanics --- some who immigrated here, others whose families have been here for generations. Not all are pro-Obama or Democrats. Also, I was watching an interesting local news show here the day after Obama's immigration policy change. They were interviewing different hispanics around town -- some were laborers, others professional types, others just people they stopped on the street -- and the general feeling I got from watching was that the "immigration" issue was important to many, but not of utmost importance to most. I think just like to many gays, gay issues are not the prevailing motivation to vote one way or the other --- same goes with hispanics. The cannot be bought, and they know when someone is trying to do that.

    If you watch the Rubio interview in the link a couple of messages up, Rubio says hispanics are particularly hurt by the economy and that those issues will be as important to them as they are to broad segments of the population.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 2:39 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidLiving in Arizona, obviously I know, and work with, many hispanics --- some who immigrated here, others whose families have been here for generations. Not all are pro-Obama or Democrats. Also, I was watching an interesting local news show here the day after Obama's immigration policy change. They were interviewing different hispanics around town -- some were laborers, others professional types, others just people they stopped on the street -- and the general feeling I got from watching was that the "immigration" issue was important to many, but not of utmost importance to most. I think just like to many gays, gay issues are not the prevailing motivation to vote one way or the other --- same goes with hispanics. They cannot be bought, and they know when someone is trying to do that.


    I suspect that Hispanics also know when a party is demonizing them in order to win political points with racists. And having Marco Rubio as the poster boy for GOP outreach won't fool anyone.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jun 19, 2012 2:47 PM GMT
    Christian73 said

    I suspect that Hispanics also know when a party is demonizing them in order to win political points with racists. And having Marco Rubio as the poster boy for GOP outreach won't fool anyone.


    Clearly it didn't hurt him getting elected. The fact is, many hispanics have far bigger fish to fry than the immigration issue. That being said, the Dems would probably be smart to not put too many of their eggs in the hispanic basket. However, I do think that this is something that will probably guarantee that Marco Rubio will NOT be the V.P. choice....though I never thought he would be anyway.
  • allatonce

    Posts: 904

    Jun 19, 2012 2:59 PM GMT
    Does it really matter if this was political or an evolution his personal feelings? The whole point of democracy is to force politicians to protect their skin by representing the public. The public is evolving on gay marriage finally and now so has he.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jun 19, 2012 3:08 PM GMT
    allatonce saidDoes it really matter if this was political or an evolution his personal feelings? The whole point of democracy is to force politicians to protect their skin by representing the public. The public is evolving on gay marriage finally and now so has he.



    No one is arguing that it's not a good thing. The only thing that is suspect is the timing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 3:10 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Christian73 said

    I suspect that Hispanics also know when a party is demonizing them in order to win political points with racists. And having Marco Rubio as the poster boy for GOP outreach won't fool anyone.


    Clearly it didn't hurt him getting elected. The fact is, many hispanics have far bigger fish to fry than the immigration issue. That being said, the Dems would probably be smart to not put too many of their eggs in the hispanic basket. However, I do think that this is something that will probably guarantee that Marco Rubio will NOT be the V.P. choice....though I never thought he would be anyway.


    Well, Obama leads Romney with Latinos by about 25 points, so...
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jun 19, 2012 3:12 PM GMT
    Christian73 said

    Well, Obama leads Romney with Latinos by about 25 points, so...



    Yes, those polls are always spot on icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 3:19 PM GMT
    allatonce saidDoes it really matter if this was political or an evolution his personal feelings? The whole point of democracy is to force politicians to protect their skin by representing the public. The public is evolving on gay marriage finally and now so has he.

    It does matter because it indicates the degree of personal commitment when there is no political advantage. Per the article cited in the OP, this is only a small step. Will the Latino community believe he will follow through with additional reforms if reelected, or forget it and not give any emphasis, which was the case when Democrats had larger majorities during his first two years.

    The larger issue is the more a president is seen as using the power of his office for strictly political purposes, the less respected and trusted he becomes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 3:26 PM GMT
    smartmoney saidJust more pandering from Obama in the months before the election. Nothing new.



    There's PANDERING TO....

    ....and 'pandering against'....also known as DEMONIZING.


    On balance, I'd rather a politician blatantly court my community by offering words of respect and even minor concessions toward our policy goals.

    As a cynic, I naturally trust the sincerity of bigots......but I won't vote for them.
    I don't think Latinos will either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 3:28 PM GMT
    smartmoney saidJust more pandering from Obama in the months before the election. Nothing new.


    An increasing number of younger, brighter guys (and women) across the country are cognizant of this fact. That's encouraging, and a sign (I hope) that Obama will be a one-term president.
  • allatonce

    Posts: 904

    Jun 19, 2012 5:56 PM GMT
    Jockbod48 said
    smartmoney saidJust more pandering from Obama in the months before the election. Nothing new.


    An increasing number of younger, brighter guys (and women) across the country are cognizant of this fact. That's encouraging, and a sign (I hope) that Obama will be a one-term president.


    Politicians aren't supposed to just do whatever the fuck they want, they are supposed to represent what the people want. They are supposed to pander. That is democracy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 19, 2012 6:28 PM GMT
    Jockbod48 said
    smartmoney saidJust more pandering from Obama in the months before the election. Nothing new.


    An increasing number of younger, brighter guys (and women) across the country are cognizant of this fact. That's encouraging, and a sign (I hope) that Obama will be a one-term president.

    While a significant percent of people favor the substance of the measure, consistent with what Sen Rubio has been working towards, the questions pertain to both Obama's motives, whether it represents a real commitment to further reform if reelected, as well as his tactics. His many quotes are being replayed showing hm stating unequivalently that he did not have the authority to do this and we have to follow the rule of law. By flip-flopping and playing fast and loose with the law and the Constitution, his commitment to the oath he took becomes highly questionable. Even people who favor the substance of the changes will have even more doubts about Obama's character and suitability to remain in office.