Posted on April 22, 2011

Immigration Is Lead Topic as Leaders Are Gathered

Julia Preston, New York Times, April 19, 2011

President Obama told a gathering of business, labor, religious and political leaders at the White House on Tuesday that he remains committed to an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws and wants to try again in the coming months to push Congress to pass a bill.

With his re-election campaign launched this month and Latino communities growing increasingly frustrated with his immigration policies, Mr. Obama summoned more than 60 high-profile supporters of the stalled overhaul legislation to a strategy session, looking for ways to revive it. Among those attending were Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York, an independent; Mayor Julian Castro of San Antonio, a Democrat; and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, a Republican.


He sought views on whether to try to pass smaller pieces of the massive overhaul, such as a bill that would give legal status to illegal immigrant students, or one that would increase visas for highly skilled foreign workers.


3 responses to “Immigration Is Lead Topic as Leaders Are Gathered”

  1. Question Diversity says:

    Here’s the problem for Obama with the salami slicing strategy: It would be more effective into getting all or most of what he wants, but it would also means there would not be one massive bill signing for something called “comprehensive immigration reform” that he can trot out to impress Hispanic politicos and voters. If he’s thinking long term for the Democrat Party, then salami slicing is better. If he’s thinking about himself for 2012, and getting the Hispanic vote jazzed again, he’ll try for a “comprehensive” big bill.

  2. Buy steroids says:

    Very efficiently written information. It will be helpful to anyone who usess it, together with myself. Keep up the nice work – for positive i’ll take a look at extra posts.

  3. Anonymous says:

    My Question: What will a Republican do in his place?

    It is also the question you need to ask. Because it is the one the Hispanics will be. They realize that they are not yet enough of a force to be dominant in U.S. politics and they are starting to see the negative consequences (Blacks -AND- Hispanics = double the sour grapes from whites) of ‘coalition politics’ as a polarizing influence upon whites.

    So the big question comes, even as they are accepting the gladhanding and stated intentions of a black president, _what if hispanics vote Republican_?

    And the answer is…??

    Would a Republican looking to secure an election make (closed door) promises to a Hispanic element looking to get serious naturalization concessions?

    Given the policies of the Bushes, Reagan and others, it must be assumed so.

    Until whites tell Republicans that they will not vote for a non-moratorium candidate, we will get -no where- as a race preserving people because our vote will be assumed and we will have no real voice.

    Which is why it may well be in our best interests to either endorse a third party candidate who does make pro-white choices. Or to allow Obama his reelection bid on the basis of Republican Whiskey Delta Refusal to stand up and say: “Not just no but I mean _NEVER_!” to present day amnesty-as-vote-buying appeasement to illegal immigration. Which is Republican sponsored just as much as it is Democratic.

    We obviously live in a world where no recall means a politician’s promise means don’t anything more than “I tried my best, sorry…” once they get into office (or back there).

    But a condition where the backside of a promise that is foresworn by a President who refuses to do what he says is different from that of a man who says, up front, that he is for moratoriums on immigration. ONLY that man deserves our vote.

    If Obama falls we cannot replace him with ‘just another republican’.