Post by midcan5 on Nov 22, 2014 8:04:45 GMT -5
"On immigration the president said this: “We are creating a whole society of really honorable, decent, family loving people who are in violation of the law.” But it wasn’t President Obama.
It was future President George H.W. Bush speaking in a debate before the 1980 Texas presidential primary, and he said people who have come here to work shouldn’t be treated like criminals. His opponent, future President Ronald Reagan, jumped in, not to slam Bush for being soft on immigration but to agree with him."
www.pressherald.com/2014/11/22/our-view-obamas-immigration-action-a-measured-response/
'Reagan and Bush Acted Unilaterally on Immigration, Too — for the Same Reason That Obama will'
www.newrepublic.com/article/120334/obama-immigration-order-legal-bush-and-reagans-were
"The President’s executive actions on immigration are limited, contingent on statutory authority and prosecutorial discretion, and temporary. They can be neutered or replaced by legitimate congressional lawmaking or a successor in the White House. This is less a power grab than an acknowledgement that the country is far from the post-partisan politics that he promised in his initial run for the presidency. That acknowledgement, however tardy, is welcome. Until we as a country face up to the destructiveness of our asymmetric partisan polarization, there is little chance of improving our dysfunctional government."
www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/11/20-obama-executive-order-immigration-speech-mann
"Imagine, if you will, the domino effect that would ensue if liberals and moderates simply tuned out the demagogues. Yes, they would still be able to manipulate their legions into endorsing cruel and self-defeating policies. But their voices would be sealed within the echo chamber of extremism and sealed off from the majority of Americans who honestly just want our common problems solved. They would be marginalized in the same way as activists who rant about racial purity or anarchy." Steve Almond
It was future President George H.W. Bush speaking in a debate before the 1980 Texas presidential primary, and he said people who have come here to work shouldn’t be treated like criminals. His opponent, future President Ronald Reagan, jumped in, not to slam Bush for being soft on immigration but to agree with him."
www.pressherald.com/2014/11/22/our-view-obamas-immigration-action-a-measured-response/
'Reagan and Bush Acted Unilaterally on Immigration, Too — for the Same Reason That Obama will'
www.newrepublic.com/article/120334/obama-immigration-order-legal-bush-and-reagans-were
"The President’s executive actions on immigration are limited, contingent on statutory authority and prosecutorial discretion, and temporary. They can be neutered or replaced by legitimate congressional lawmaking or a successor in the White House. This is less a power grab than an acknowledgement that the country is far from the post-partisan politics that he promised in his initial run for the presidency. That acknowledgement, however tardy, is welcome. Until we as a country face up to the destructiveness of our asymmetric partisan polarization, there is little chance of improving our dysfunctional government."
www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/11/20-obama-executive-order-immigration-speech-mann
"Imagine, if you will, the domino effect that would ensue if liberals and moderates simply tuned out the demagogues. Yes, they would still be able to manipulate their legions into endorsing cruel and self-defeating policies. But their voices would be sealed within the echo chamber of extremism and sealed off from the majority of Americans who honestly just want our common problems solved. They would be marginalized in the same way as activists who rant about racial purity or anarchy." Steve Almond
