National Journal: Dems Didn’t Run Far or Fast Enough From Obama

Screen Shot 2014-07-11 at 3.34.22 PM

(Newsmax) – In anticipation of Democrats losing control of the Senate, White House officials are implying that candidates should have tied themselves more closely to President Barack Obama, but according to the National Journal, “this is pure delusion.”

“Obama is the main reason Republicans are well-positioned to win control of the upper chamber next Tuesday. And Democrats’ biggest strategic mistake in this election is that most candidates didn’t run away far and fast enough,” wrote Josh Kraushaar, political editor of the National Journal.

“Given the president’s rock-bottom approval numbers in the many Republican-friendly Senate states that Democrats needed to win — as well as the reality of a worsening political environment for the party as early as last winter — that distance was a downright necessity. But a host of Senate candidates failed to create it, and the party is likely to pay the price in Senate seats.”

SEND CONGRESS A PINK SLIP: Gun grabs, Martial Law, amnesty, executive orders, unconstitutional laws, bypassing Congress and the Constitution— Obama has committed a string high crimes and misdemeanors. YOU can send a PINK SLIP to every member of Congress putting them on notice: “IMPEACH OBAMA NOW OR WE’RE KICKING YOU OUT!”

The Journal named Sens. Mark Udall of Colorado and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire as two examples of vulnerable Democrats in swing states who didn’t do enough to distance themselves from Obama.

And in red states held by Democrats, the magazine said, the limited criticisms of the administration’s policies on Obamacare and the Keystone XL pipeline were not sufficient to convince voters of a true distinction from Obama.

There have also been deficiencies in the way the Democratic candidates in Kentucky and Arkansas have conducted their campaigns. In the first instance, Alison Lundergan Grimes found herself in difficult territory by trying to appease both liberals and conservatives. In Sen. Mark Pryor’s race, he relied too much on attacks against his opponent’s conservatism and a misguided assumption about the strength of his own personal brand.

“To be sure, in a nationalized election, even those who break from an unpopular president often fall victim to his political problems. The biggest victims in the 2010 wave election were House Democrats in conservative districts, most of whom voted against the president’s healthcare law. Their opposition did little to help them. But in Senate races, where candidates’ personal brands play a bigger role, there’s more opportunity to create space,” the Journal said.

“This year’s midterms are shaping up to be a referendum on President Obama’s management, giving anxious voters an opportunity to express their frustration about everything from the president’s handling of healthcare, growing terrorism threats, an Ebola scare, and a broken immigration system, among others.”

The Journal concluded by saying “Democrats should have recognized that the president was falling out of favor with the public and inoculated themselves a long time ago. Instead, many bought the White House’s spin, and are at risk of going down with a sinking ship.”

- See more at: http://www.teaparty.org/national-journal-dems-didnt-run-far-or-fast-enough-from-obama-64886/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=social#sthash.qHsXm1V1.dpuf

OBAMA PREPARES AMNESTY PLAN

Screen Shot 2014-10-30 at 11.49.39 AM

By LAURA MECKLER

WASHINGTON—The White House is considering two central requirements in deciding which of the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants would gain protections through an expected executive action: a minimum length of time in the U.S., and a person’s family ties to others in the country, said people familiar with the administration’s thinking.

Those requirements, depending on how broadly they are drawn, could offer protection to between one million and four million people in the country illegally.

The deliberations follow President Barack Obama ’s promise to act to change the immigration system, after legislation overhauling immigration law died in Congress.

Republicans have protested that Mr. Obama would overstep his authority by acting alone. Several Democratic candidates in tight races also have complained, and last month the president canceled plans to announce the changes before the election.

Mr. Obama, who has been criticized by immigrant-rights advocates for the delay, wants to grant new protections—such as safe harbor from deportation and work permits—to many people who are in the U.S. illegally but have significant ties to the country, said three people familiar with White House thinking.

Such protections would be temporary since the president lacks authority to give people permanent legal status.

Demonstrators protest President Obama’s immigration policies in Washington earlier this month. ENLARGE
Demonstrators protest President Obama’s immigration policies in Washington earlier this month. AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES
One person said officials are leaning toward granting protections to people in the country illegally for 10 years and who meet other criteria, though that could be broadened to include more recent arrivals.

Parents of U.S. citizens are likely to qualify, people familiar with discussions said, as long as they meet other criteria. But it is unclear whether the policy would include parents of so-called Dreamers—people brought to the U.S. illegally as children, and who were given a temporary legal status in 2012.

Also unclear is whether other family ties, such as being married to a U.S. citizen, would qualify somebody for new protections. Illegal immigrants cannot win legal status by marriage unless they return to their home country for a period of years.

The answers to those questions will determine whether up to four million people or as few as just over one million gain protections, according to estimates prepared by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, which the White House has consulted.

White House spokeswoman Katherine Vargas said the president hasn’t made a decision or even received recommendations from his cabinet secretaries. “It is premature to speculate about the specific details,” she said. Still, a mid-December announcement of the change is expected by many immigration experts.

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R., Fla.), who tried to move immigration legislation through the House this year, said executive action would amplify distrust among Republicans in Mr. Obama and make legislating harder. “The right’s going to fly off the rails,” he said. “How do you trust someone who says he does not have the legal authority to do something and then does it anyway?” Mr. Obama previously said that his ability to change immigration law on his own was limited.

White House officials also are considering allowing more young people into the 2012 “Dreamer’’ program that grants temporary legal status and work permits to those who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children, according to two people familiar with discussions. Some 580,000 people were enrolled in the program as of June.

No matter how the White House draws the criteria, the number gaining new protections is certain to be less than the eight million or so who would have benefited from legislation that the Senate passed last year, but that died amid GOP opposition in the House.

Any package along these lines is sure to be attacked by Republicans and possibly some Democrats as presidential overreach. Administration officials say they are working to make sure that whatever they do is legally and politically defensible.

One person people familiar with the process said the White House is trying to craft a plan that survives Mr. Obama’s presidency and isn’t so unpopular that a future Republican president could easily reverse it. “It has to be politically sustainable,” this person said.

One of the most politically sensitive questions is whether to include parents of young people in the Dreamer program, known formally as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. These people are among the most politically active in the immigration debate and are demanding that their parents not be left out.

The president “must be inclusive, and he must be broad, to protect as many people as possible,” said Cristina Jimenez, managing director of the group United We Dream. “Any package of administrative reform must include our parents.”

Republicans have said that broad executive action would kill any chance for immigration legislation next year. Democrats reply that chances already are low that the two parties could come to agreement on a bill. Immigration activists are pressing Mr. Obama to take the most sweeping action possible.

The White House also is expected to change criteria used in deciding who is a priority for deportation. It may, for instance, say a traffic violation doesn’t make someone a priority, though other convictions do. The legal rationale is that the administration lacks the capacity to deport all illegal immigrants and has discretion to set priorities.

Other changes are expected to benefit businesses that use large numbers of legal immigrants, such as technology companies. One change under consideration would “recapture” unused visas from previous years in order to make more visas available to such companies, according to one person familiar with the deliberations. This person said that a second change that companies have requested—changing the way visas are counted so that a family unit counts as only one spot toward the limit—is less likely.

This person said the administration is also considering a change that would make it easier for foreign students to stay in the U.S. after graduation while they await employment-based visas.

White House officials are inclined to wait to announce the new policy until after a must-pass spending bill has cleared Congress, to avoid tangling that legislation with any GOP effort to roll back the immigration policy.

Further, the Louisiana Senate race may not be decided until a Dec. 6 runoff, and White House officials want to avoid injecting immigration into any re-election fight by Sen. Mary Landrieu , a Democrat.

It also is possible that the Georgia Senate race will remain unsolved until an early January runoff, but a senior administration official said there is no thought to pushing the announcement into next year. Mr. Obama has repeatedly vowed to act by year’s end.

La Raza Circulates State-By-State Guide On Where To Vote Without ID…

http://launch.newsinc.com/share.html?trackingGroup=90046&siteSection=dailycaller&videoId=28066715

http://launch.newsinc.com/?type=VideoPlayer/Single&widgetId=1&trackingGroup=69016&siteSection=dailycaller&videoId=28066715

Screen Shot 2014-10-29 at 11.47.52 AM
PATRICK HOWLEY
Political Reporter
SEE ALL ARTICLES
SEND EMAIL
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
FOLLOW ON TWITTER
BIO
PATRICK HOWLEY

The pro-amnesty Hispanic activist organization the National Council of La Raza helpfully promoted a Washington Post article explaining which states people can vote in without having to use a photo ID.

“Voter ID laws are at-issue across the country, with newly Republican-controlled legislatures having passed them in numerous states after the 2010 election,” explained The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake. “Most states still request some form of ID, but don’t require it. Another 20 states don’t require identification. In case you’re wondering where your state is at in all of this, a helpful (sic) graphic from the Post’s graphics team.”

So who ended up using the Post’s helpful graphic? The country’s foremost pro-amnesty Hispanic immigrant organization.

The Chicago chapter of Asian Americans Advancing Justice tweeted Blake’s article with the message, “Reminder — #Illinois does NOT require #voterID to cast a ballot,” along with the pro-Democrat hashtag #TurnOutForWhat. The tweet was helpfully retweeted by the National Council of La Raza.

Politics: Media not too eager to tell you Ottawa shooter was Islam convert

Screen Shot 2014-10-24 at 11.49.22 AM

Terror of one sort or another.

We still don’t really know very much about the shooting that took place at the Canadian parliament building in Ottawa yesterday, leaving a courageous Canadian soldier named Nathan Carillo (just 24 years old) dead, and ultimately bringing about the death of the shooter at the hands of the parliament’s sergeant-at-arms. Nice work, sir.

We also know, via the Toronto Globe and Mail this morning, that shooter Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was not only a recent convert to Islam, but was being watched by Canadian authorities because they considered him a threat:

Sources told The Globe and Mail that he was recently designated a “high-risk traveller” by the Canadian government and was unable to secure the appropriate travel documentation, thus blocking his attempt to travel abroad. The circumstances are similar to that surrounding the case of Martin Rouleau-Couture, the Quebecker who was shot Monday after running down two Canadian Forces soldiers with his car.

Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau was born in 1982 and was the son of Bulgasem Zehaf, a Quebec businessman who appears to have fought in 2011 in Libya, and Susan Bibeau, the deputy chairperson of a division of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board.

Mr. Zehaf-Bibeau has a record in Quebec in the early 2000s for petty crimes such as possession of drugs, credit-card forgery and robbery. He was also charged with robbery in 2011 in Vancouver.

Much of the media are characteristically low-keying the Islam connection, since they are more concerned with following PC rules about “profiling” than they are about telling us the whole story.

It’s impossible to know at this point whether Zehaf-Bibeau was acting on his own, perhaps having been inspired by his ISIS heroes, or whether he was coordinating with someone else. Either way, it wouldn’t be downplay the terrorist nature of the act, as governments are want to do. One of the most horrifying scenarios is the one in which a lone wolf simply gets ahold of a gun (by the way, a lot of good Canada’s gun control laws did here, huh?) and simply opens fire. There’s almost no way to anticipate it because it doesn’t require any sort of planning or collaboration that can be detected, and there’s almost nothing you can do to stop a guy like this from wandering wherever he wants to wander and going for it.

If he has no fear of his own death – and I’d guess that in this case he didn’t – he’ll just unleash as much mayhem as he has time for. That’s terrorism by any measure.

Kudos to Canada, by the way, for their decision to return to normal business today. The right way to respond to terrorism is to do what you would normally do. To this day the left is having fits because George W. Bush told American to go shopping after 9/11. They can’t believe he didn’t “ask us to sacrifice.” But Bush told people to go shopping because that is what they would normally do, and his point was that you can’t let them disrupt our way of life.

At least the Canadian parliament seems to understand that.

Feds Getting Ready for Executive Action on Immigration

ObamaSombrero

By Suzanne Gamboa

León Rodríguez, the new head of Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), recalled how he was put on the “wait list” and eventually denied admission to Georgetown Law School, where he spoke Tuesday.

He tried to persuade the school’s officials to let him in and was told he was lucky to be on a wait list. The story is a metaphor for immigration policy, he said.

“What we do in immigration policy is decide who we want to admit to the U.S. and who we don’t,” he said.

Now Rodríguez is heading Citizenship and Immigration Services, a part of the Department of Homeland Security.

“Looking back Georgetown, would you have admitted me? Would you have had different policies?” he said to chuckles from an audience attending an immigration law and policy conference.

Rodríguez’s agency will be front and center once President Barack Obama announces the executive action he’ll take on immigration. Obama said he would take executive action after the elections but before the end of the year.

“We’re going to be ready,” Rodríguez said. “Our agency will be shouldering the primary responsibility for executing whatever it is.”

Rodríguez declined to elaborate when he was asked by a reporter to give more details on what types of preparations he is making.

EXCLUSIVE: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION QUIETLY PREPARES ‘SURGE’ OF MILLIONS OF NEW IMMIGRANT IDS

Capture

http://video.breitbart.com/?ndn.trackingGroup=90085&ndn.siteSection=breitbart_nws_pol_sty_vmppap&ndn.videoId=26485577&freewheel=90085&sitesection=breitbart_nws_pol_sty_vmppap&vid=26485577

Despite no official action from the president ahead of the election, the Obama administration has quietly begun preparing to issue millions of work authorization permits, suggesting the implementation of a large-scale executive amnesty may have already begun.

Unnoticed until now, a draft solicitation for bids issued by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Oct. 6 says potential vendors must be capable of handling a “surge” scenario of 9 million id cards in one year “to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements.”
The request for proposals says the agency will need a minimum of four million cards per year. In the “surge,” scenario in 2016, the agency would need an additional five million cards – more than double the baseline annual amount for a total of 9 million.
“The guaranteed minimum for each ordering period is 4,000,000 cards. The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards,” the document says.
The agency is buying the materials need to construct both Permanent Residency Cards (PRC), commonly known as green cards, as well as Employment Authorization Documentation (EAD) cards which have been used to implement President Obama’s “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) program. The RFP does not specify how many of each type of card would be issued.
Jessica Vaughan, an immigration expert at the Center for Immigration Studies and former State Department official, said the document suggests a new program of remarkable breadth.
The RFP “seems to indicate that the president is contemplating an enormous executive action that is even more expansive than the plan that Congress rejected in the ‘Gang of Eight’ bill,” Vaughan said.
Last year, Vaughan reviewed the Gang of Eight’s provisions to estimate that it would have roughly doubled legal immigration. In the “surge” scenario of this RFP, even the relatively high four million cards per year would be more than doubled, meaning that even on its own terms, the agency is preparing for a huge uptick of 125 percent its normal annual output.
It’s not unheard of for federal agencies to plan for contingencies, but the request specifically explains that the surge is related to potential changes in immigration policy.
“The Contractor shall demonstrate the capability to support potential ‘surge’ in PRC and EAD card demand for up to 9M cards during the initial period of performance to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements,” the document says.
A year ago, such a plan might have been attributed to a forthcoming immigration bill. Now, following the summer’s border crisis, the chances of such a new law are extremely low, giving additional credence to the possibility the move is in preparation for an executive amnesty by Obama.
Even four million combined green cards and EADs is a significant number, let alone the “surge” contemplated by USCIS. For instance, in the first two years after Obama unilaterally enacted DACA, about 600,000 people were approved by USCIS under the program. Statistics provided by USCIS on its website show that the entire agency had processed 862,000 total EADs in 2014 as of June.
Vaughan said EADs are increasingly coming under scrutiny as a tool used by the Obama administration to provide legalization for groups of illegal aliens short of full green card status.
In addition to providing government approval to work for illegal aliens, EADs also cost significantly less in fees to acquire, about $450 compared to more than $1000. In many states, EADs give aliens rights to social services and the ability to obtain drivers’ licenses.
Vaughan noted there are currently about 4.5 million individuals waiting for approval for the green cards having followed immigration law and obtained sponsorships from relatives in the U.S. or otherwise, less than the number of id cards contemplated by the USCIS “surge.”
USCIS officials did not provide additional information about the RFP by press time.