The Politics Of Ugly: Arizona, Immigration, Obama’s Birth Certificate, Rezko, Cap And Trade, Jobs, – And The Beautiful Hillary Clinton

After today, Americans will be more disgusted than ever. We predict the disgust will mean even bigger wins for Republicans this November. That does not mean that Obama’s Dimocrats will not try every gruesome trick to gin up voters with extra bamboozlement. It’s the Politics of Ugly. Let’s survey the battlefield of “no Red State, no Blue State” America, under the heel of “uniter not divider” Barack Obama.

Before the Big Ugly, let’s bask in a little bit of Hillary Clinton sunlight. Regular readers will note our increased attention [HERE, and HERE] to matters Hillary. We are not alone (the Big Media types read Big Pink) and others have noted the same phenomena we do. Although, some back yard know-little bloggers proclaimed Hillary Clinton “has no base to keep, her political years [are] now behind her” and Obama lover Ben Smith of Politico proclaimed “Game Over – The Clintons Stand Alone” in his Hillary political obituary, we opened the coffin and found Hillary had broken free.

Today, less infatuated Politico writers abandon the old silly Ben Smith narrative and adopt a much more sober, Big Pinkish, narrative. According to Politico today, political Hillary lives:

“Nearly two years after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ended her losing presidential campaign and endorsed rival Barack Obama, Clinton’s allies maintain a triad of groups that have continued to make her presence felt in the political world — and could serve as a platform for the next phase of her public life. [snip]

The three entities operate almost completely apart from Clinton, who is barred by protocol from active involvement in outside groups (particularly those involved in partisan politics). But their operations are intertwined, sharing the same Washington offices and drawing from the same pool of supporters and staff.[snip]

“No Limits has allowed a core group of Hillary supporters who were with the campaign from the beginning to the end to continue to interact with each other, and that’s important, because if you don’t keep them together, then they are going to go off and do other things,” said Kevin Thurman, who, as deputy new media director for the Clinton campaign, helped build and manage Clinton’s online presence, including the e-mail list. [snip]

The group’s first conference in November was described in a story circulated by No Limits as “really more of a reunion” for supporters of Clinton’s presidential campaign.[snip]

Clinton has said in a series of interviews that, though she loves being secretary of state, she finds the job grueling and can’t imagine doing it beyond one term. “It wears you out,” she told Esquire.

Doug Hattaway, a senior aide in her presidential campaign, said “her brand is as strong as it ever has been. Her approval rating is as high as anyone in Washington, and she’s building a global following.”

As for what that future would be, Clinton told PBS’s Tavis Smiley that she could imagine “ going back to private life and spending time reading, and writing, and maybe teaching, doing some personal travel … just focusing on issues of women, girls, families, the kind of intersection between what’s considered ‘realpolitik’ and real life politics, which has always fascinated me.”

All the disclaimers by the Hillary campaign operation to what has always “fascinated” Hillary appear in the article. But clearly Big Media is aware that something is up, and it’s not poll flaccid Barack Obama.

On a side note, Politico yesterday whined about how Big Media is hostile to Barack Obama. A certain Rabble Rouser observed what any and all sentient beings thought: “I hadn’t noticed that they were “down on President Obama,” had you?” No, Big Media mostly continues to protect Barack Obama. What the real complaint by Big Media outlets amounts to is that they want the Obama thugs to feed them, not just the New York Times, the articles to publish. No sympathy from us, Big Media – you bought him, you own him.

Now the ugly.

Rezko

Are we the only ones that notice the lack of attention to a certain birth certificate and other missing papers in the whole debate about the new Arizona law and the issue of immigration, as well as in the Blagojevich subpoena of Obama? If Obama had his official documents open to public inspection maybe he would feel less anxiety about the “undocumented” (both alien and incorporated) in the United States and would have more credibility when asking corporations for their papers and documents. (If ever he had actually worked Obama would not try to tell people when they have made enough money.)

And where are the boxes of Illinois Senate papers that Obama has yet to produce? These papers would answer questions about the freezing tenants and whether these abused African-Americans called Illinois State Senator Obama to complain about the tenements Obama “real estate fairy” Antoin “Tony” Rezko purchased with the assistance of Obama. Maybe that’s what those bags of cash from Rezko to Obama (the latest allegations from the Blagojevich subpoena of Obama) were for? [Hey, Big Media, this is not a story that Obama will feed you, you will have to find it out for yourselves. That’s right. “Work”, that thing you hate to do.]

Barack Obama’s Illegal Alien Aunt

Are we the only ones that notice the non-mention of Obama’s illegal alien Aunt Zeituni in the entire illegal immigration and the Arizona debate? Isn’t that sort of pertinent? You know, illegal aliens (“undocumented aliens/workers” for the politically correct), and an Aunt of Obama who was invited to the Obama inaugural? Isn’t that at least a point of interest?

But of course when it comes to Obama we don’t expect questions to be asked. Especially not about the Aunt that Obama exploited then dumped – at least publicly. As we wrote long ago, Aunt Zeituni seems to be a very nice woman and the sins of her vile nephew should not be held against her. But she did donate money to the Obama campaign even though she is very poor and in the United States illegally and supposedly not eligible to donate money to political campaigns. Questions anybody? Big Media? Anybody?

Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate

Questions? That is so old hat. Today we find that instead of answers, what Americans get about Obama is – “shut up with your questions”. This is probably the third or fourth time we have written about Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Our view on the Barack Obama Birth Certificate issue was enunciated in July 27, during the Gates “racist” Crowley period of Hope and Change. We are in favor of full source materials and full documentation. Today Hawaii Dimocrats say “shut up”:

“The Hawaii legislature has now officially passed a measure that would allow state officials to legally ignore each month’s dozens of repeated requests by persons or organizations seeking to see the infant Obama’s actual birth certificate.

For personal privacy reasons the certificate resides under government lock and key in Hawaii and, as is his right, Obama has never authorized its release.

That’s a refusal that has only inflamed conspiracy theorists who theorize that if it’s really legit, what’s Obama’s problem with disclosing it? The repeated non-response of spokesmen has been that’s a silly issue. [snip]

Tuesday Hawaii’s Legislature approved a bill that would allow state officials to make a surgical exception in the state’s public records law allowing the state to ignore any such repeated requests, meaning, of course, those for the sitting Democratic president. Since not too many other Hawaiian babies have been involved in such stubborn situations.”

For years Big Media protected Obama with the lie that the actual Birth Certificate has been released. Hawaii’s action makes that Big Media narrative a lie. Maybe it’s time for a new Big Media narrative from those allegedly pissed off Big Media types? And hey, don’t forget that box of State Senate documents we need to see. Maybe Blagojevich will get some of these documents.

Arizona

Gay Leaders must be chagrined with Obama’s position on the new Arizona immigration law. When it came to gay issues in the U.S. courts, Barack Obama filed ugly briefs stained with his hatred of Gay Americans. The Obama justification for filing those ugly briefs is that as President he has to uphold current law. But when it comes to Arizona’s immigration law, Barack Obama is arms akimbo with “it’s misguided” and ‘let’s do what we have to do to prevent Arizona from enforcement of federal law’. Of course this is all just words and Latinos will get what Gay Americans got – NOTHING, but words.

Now, understand, we know that all this Arizona business is all politics all the time. John McCain in trouble and Harry Reid in trouble so both seek political advantage from the situation from opposite directions. McCain needs to prove his conservative credentials and Reid needs to do something to get voters to not hate him. Obama and his Dimocrats see ginned up liberals and ginned up Latinos and ginned up donors as a way to prevent the November flood. Republicans see the polls with majority support as a way to gin up their base too. It’s all politics and it is ugly.

No one doubts immigration needs to be reformed, but the NObama Coalition distrusts Barack Obama and there are simply not the votes to pass honest immigration reform at this time. It’s all politics and it is ugly.

Those “illegals” in the United States are in a difficult position because of this ugliness. Yes, they are here illegally and meanwhile legal immigrants get the short end of the stick by following the law. But, we do feel sympathy for those in this country for jobs and a better life who fear the knock on the door. This is emotional and we do not like siding with law enforcement over these sympathetic “illegal” immigrants. However, they are in the United States illegally and that is always a precarious situation to be in no matter what country you are in. Again, we feel the fear in our bones for these “illegals” and that is an emotional response on our part.

But we do recognize that the fear and the laws and the problems are mostly political. Arizona citizens who fear murder or drug dealers have a legitimate concern that for political reasons the Dimocrats and the Republicans will not respond. Instead of solving the problem (secure all the borders, keep drug dealers and munitions out of the country) and then arrive at a sane immigration policy we are all stuck in the mud.

The final step, not the first, in immigration policy has to be what to do with the “illegals”, and clearly tens of millions of people cannot be thrown out summarily. But neither can Big Business be allowed to import workers with impunity and keep wages low, nor can a “I broke the law and came here so I must be allowed to stay” mentality be rewarded. To complicate matters, any attempt to have “illegals” come from the shadows and accept conditions (“the path to citizenship”) in order to stay here will mostly be ignored, because that is what they have been doing anyway.

This is a tough nut to crack because “illegals” are not stupid and are not going to accept “back of the line” conditions when they can simply do what they have been doing all along. Bottom line, as much as everyone protests about illegal immigration, officials will not ever do anything meaningful to address the issue. The most officials will do is exploit the issue for political advantage. In that sense, we truly are all in the same boat.

As to the Arizona situation:

“ON Friday, Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona signed a law — SB 1070 — that prohibits the harboring of illegal aliens and makes it a state crime for an alien to commit certain federal immigration crimes. It also requires police officers who, in the course of a traffic stop or other law-enforcement action, come to a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal alien verify the person’s immigration status with the federal government.[snip]

“Now, suddenly, if you don’t have your papers … you’re going to be harassed,” the president said. “That’s not the right way to go.” But since 1940, it has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep such registration documents with them. The Arizona law simply adds a state penalty to what was already a federal crime. Moreover, as anyone who has traveled abroad knows, other nations have similar documentation requirements.[snip]

While it is true that Washington holds primary authority in immigration, the Supreme Court since 1976 has recognized that states may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration without being pre-empted by federal law. As long as Congress hasn’t expressly forbidden the state law in question, the statute doesn’t conflict with federal law and Congress has not displaced all state laws from the field, it is permitted. That’s why Arizona’s 2007 law making it illegal to knowingly employ unauthorized aliens was sustained by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[snip]

Arizona is the ground zero of illegal immigration. Phoenix is the hub of human smuggling and the kidnapping capital of America, with more than 240 incidents reported in 2008. It’s no surprise that Arizona’s police associations favored the bill, along with 70 percent of Arizonans.

President Obama and the Beltway crowd feel these problems can be taken care of with “comprehensive immigration reform” — meaning amnesty and a few other new laws. But we already have plenty of federal immigration laws on the books, and the typical illegal alien is guilty of breaking many of them. What we need is for the executive branch to enforce the laws that we already have.”

Nothing will be done, except exploitation of the voters.


Immigration And Cap and Trade

Oh, it’s more ugly. Hey, it’s politics and when you have someone in charge who does not know what he is doing or how to get jobs for ordinary “others” – bamboozlement is the order of the day:

Elementary prudence would seem to dictate that the leadership would quickly pivot to the economy and would sustain that focus through the spring and summer. [snip] But now, the leadership is moving toward, or backing into, months dominated by some combination of immigration and climate change—and of course there will also be a Supreme Court confirmation battle to fight. It is hard to believe that the people will respond favorably.

No doubt strategists on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue will point out that intensity is the key to midterm elections and that right now the intensity gap strongly favors the Republicans. The only way to counter-mobilize a somewhat demoralized Democratic base is to target the issues its components care about the most—immigration for Hispanics, climate change for young people—or so the argument runs.

That sounds too clever by half.”

It is too clever and won’t work. We suspect the Republicans will benefit. While liberals are the target vote in the immigration debate (illegals are not supposed to vote) we doubt they will be as energized by this debate as much as the more conservative Republicans in the illegal immigration battlefield, which is the Southwest. There is also the probability of failure:

“In the first place, it’s very unlikely that either immigration or climate change legislation will succeed in this congress. If passing health care did not increase public support for Democrats, why will failing to pass immigration reform or climate change legislation work any better?

Second, Democrats seem to assume that they have nothing left to lose—that all the people who will vote against them this November have already made up their minds—so that focusing on non-economic issues dear to the base will be all gain and no pain. Again, I wonder. Might it not reinforce the message that Democrats are out of touch and unwilling to heed the people’s concerns? Over the past nine months, many independents who supported Democrats in 2006 and 2008 have moved away from the party. More could follow.”

“Cap and Trade” is a sure loser for Dimocrats this November. Coal producing states will run from Dimocrats if there is even a debate on this issue. Even groups like Greenpeace are against the current proposal. Immigration is a sure loser for Dimocrats too this November.

“Granted, in the long term, the politics of immigration will certainly work in favor of the Democrats. Look at California: Republicans have never recovered from the legislation and rhetoric of Pete Wilson’s governorship. In the short term, however, the issue could push in the opposite direction. While the immigration debate of 2006-2007 divided Republicans, it also divided Democrats, and this year the issue will most hurt endangered Democrats in tough districts.[snip]

Here’s why: 90 percent of the electorate is not Hispanic, and 85 percent is not young. Relatively modest shifts in voter sentiment outside these two groups could easily swamp increased turnout within them and turn all-but-certain Democratic losses into a rout of historic proportions. While the temptation to adopt a strategy of targeted micro-politics is understandable, Democrats should instead espouse a strategy of macro-politics focused on broad-based public concerns. If that means that Senate Democrats will have to choose a new majority leader next January, so be it. At least they’ll still have a majority.”

Yes, the whole, “policy” agenda for Dimocrats is a way to avoid discussing the economy and jobs. The Hill has a list of those hurt and helped by the debate on the immigration issue, but overall, it is a loser for Dimocrats this November. Harry Reid might be helped, but not enough, and many other Dimocrats will be hurt.

“An aggressive and polarizing push for comprehensive immigration reform could bolster the chances of vulnerable House Democrats who need a high Latino turnout to keep their seats this fall.

The move to thrust immigration ahead of climate change legislation on the Senate agenda has been seen as a strategy to boost the imperiled reelection bid of Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). [snip]

The immigration effort comes as President Barack Obama is trying to reunite the coalition that helped elect him in 2008. [snip]

Yet it is unclear whether incumbents in tough 2010 races will embrace the new push on immigration, even in districts with significant Hispanic populations.

The key question for Democrats is whether the potential benefit in turning out Latino voters in many races will offset the difficulty that vulnerable incumbents will face in districts that favor a hard-line approach to illegal immigration.

For many Democrats — particularly Blue Dogs in the Rust Belt and the South — there is clearly little appetite for legislation that provides a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

More than 30 House Democrats signed on last year to the SAVE Act, a bill sponsored by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) that enhances border security and enforcement mechanisms but does not provide a path to citizenship.[snip]

For party leaders, the rationale in tackling a politically explosive issue in an election year might be that there’s limited risk because the conservative GOP base is already riled up.”

Ugly.

Charlie Crist

Charlie should call Arlen Specter. Yesterday Specter had this to say:

“Well, I probably shouldn’t say this. But I have thought from time to time that I might have helped the country more if I’d stayed a Republican.”

Specter became an Obama Dimocrat in order to keep his job. Most Americans would love to keep their job by switching political parties (something which might be a rationale for many this November). Today Charlie Crist joins the Lieberman and Specter desperation brigade. Crist will learn that Obama will not help him nor will becoming a Dimocrat get him elected. Political desperation alone explains Charlie Crist’s move today:

“While Crist, lagging badly in his Senate primary bid, is sure to pin the blame on a party-that-left-him, his move can’t simply be chalked up as a response to an ongoing purge of moderates.

The more complicated truth, say top GOP officials from both wings of the party, is that an ornery conservative base is expressing its disgust for Republicans who have both flagrantly defied the party and who represent a distrusted political establishment.

It’s not just that Crist has veered from party orthodoxy, though that’s part of it. Rather, he and his fellow endangered GOP centrists have been tagged as insiders at a time when voters are disgusted by Washington specifically and incumbents generally.”

Yes, Americans are disgusted. Americans are disgusted with all political parties but it is Dimocrats who are the target of the ire. A leader, like a certain plucky blond lady, would understand the disgust and listen to it. A flim-flam artist only exploits the anger even as it consume his erstwhile political allies. The self-interested opportunist will divide not unite. The self-interested opportunist will wear whatever political clothing cheapest:

“This is what gives elected officials a bad name – when they abandon long-standing principles for their own selfish political gain,” Upton said. “He’s gone from public servant to a political hack.”

Cole said Crist’s jump would suggest only that, “’My political survival is more important than the party I’ve been aligned with.’”

He added: “It reduces politics to egotism and that’s not going to play well.”

Charlie Crist is an ugly picture of desperation.



In Merry Old England, the politics presage American politics. Does this sound familiar?:

“We haven’t had a campaign, of course – just a few telly programmes – but we didn’t need one to form the key conclusion about the state of our politics: that the Government to which we are preparing to say farewell is the most abominable in living memory, exceeding even John Major’s and Ted Heath’s in its destructiveness, stupidity, dishonesty and incompetence.

I need hardly say why, but I shall. Its destruction of our prosperity and its barely concealed and irrational hatred of wealth-creators; its infantilisation of people through the welfare state and its cultivation of a taxpayer-funded clientele; its sundering of the United Kingdom by devolution; its contempt for Parliament; its reduction of state schools to third-rate child-minding operations, and of our universities to underfunded vocational training colleges; its deliberate subversion of our culture and way of life by uncontrolled immigration; its surrender to the forces of anti-democracy in Europe; its imperilling of our Armed Forces, aggravated by the hypocrisy with which it praises them; its disdain for our countryside and its people; above all its naked tribalism and gerrymandering, and its leech-like attitude towards the productive sectors that must pay for it. It has been a disgrace, and the man who leads it is to blame.

Many Americans will agree with the above statement from Britain and will apply it to America. In November, Barack Obama and his Dimocrats are going to learn just how ugly, ugly can get.

Share