So will the lesson be that amnesty is not something the American people support, or that it is necessary to do it through executive action rather than having legislators endanger themselves by voting on it?
6 comments:
Tom
said...
Or, pass something that has all the right words to placate voters, but make the fine print the real law.
Yeah, pass-a-2000-page-law-that-no-one-has-read seems like a wonderful strategy for avoiding responsibility. "Oh, the law obligates you to donate your firstborn child to the state for medical research? Wow, I don't know how I missed that."
Sure those two propositions are not mutually exclusive? If the American people repeatedly make it clear that they despise a particular policy, the only way to enact it will be to circumvent the electorate and implement it through (probably illegal) unilateral executive action.
But what lives by the pen, dies by the pen. He hasn't got that much time left. If he wants the next president to be a Republican, this would be a good strategy to pursue: make it clear that no matter who's in the Senate, nothing but a Republican in the White House can put a stop to his nonsense.
A) The lame duck President and Senate can do a tremendous lot of damage in the next two months: judgeship confirmations, an Attorney General to confirm, cover for Obama's immigration travesties, etc.
B) It's all those dumb voters' fault for not understanding what I'm saying.
C) It's what those two-thirds who didn't vote want.
6 comments:
Or, pass something that has all the right words to placate voters, but make the fine print the real law.
Yeah, pass-a-2000-page-law-that-no-one-has-read seems like a wonderful strategy for avoiding responsibility. "Oh, the law obligates you to donate your firstborn child to the state for medical research? Wow, I don't know how I missed that."
Sure those two propositions are not mutually exclusive? If the American people repeatedly make it clear that they despise a particular policy, the only way to enact it will be to circumvent the electorate and implement it through (probably illegal) unilateral executive action.
But what lives by the pen, dies by the pen. He hasn't got that much time left. If he wants the next president to be a Republican, this would be a good strategy to pursue: make it clear that no matter who's in the Senate, nothing but a Republican in the White House can put a stop to his nonsense.
Why can't it be both? It is for Obama.
Well, we'd have to pass it to find out what's in it, of course.
A) The lame duck President and Senate can do a tremendous lot of damage in the next two months: judgeship confirmations, an Attorney General to confirm, cover for Obama's immigration travesties, etc.
B) It's all those dumb voters' fault for not understanding what I'm saying.
C) It's what those two-thirds who didn't vote want.
Because, D) Republicans.
Eric Hines
Post a Comment