Here's an interesting opinion piece from, of all place, the Chicago Tribune. The article addresses several issues regarding the immigration lawsuit the federal government intends to file against the state of Arizona and why it's nothing more than pure politics.
Federal immigration law vs. The 10th Amendment? Does INA Section 287(g) conflict with SB 1070 or should it be adding federal support to Arizona's efforts? Why single out Arizona and not file a lawsuit over Rhode Island immigration law? There are some interesting questions to be asked about Mr. Obama's (usual) inconsistencies on this issue (like most others).
It can't really be as simple as it appears:
1. Obama is without question the most left-leaning president since FDR.
2. Arizona is a very conservative "red" state (and Rhode Island is democrat).
3. Eventual amnesty would create millions of new voters for a president and party that, according to every major poll, are on their way out. This is something they've obviously thought about; Nancy Pelosi herself told the Catholic Community Conference in May that they must convince their parishioners to support amnesty as a "manifestation of our living the gospel", kind of like her unwavering support for abortion and gay rights.
Every day we get a little bit more transparency in government. That's the one promise they've held true to.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.