Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, October 24, 2016


President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama spent part of the day after Thanksgiving with immigration reform activists camped out on Capitol Hill.

Of the 20 activists the First Couple spoke to inside a heated tent on Friday, three have not eaten for more than two weeks.

The president reportedly told the group that he supported their effort but worried about the health of the hunger strikers.

“He said we might think about handing the torch over and taking a break,” activist Christian Avila told the Los Angeles Times.

House Republican leaders have said that there will be no votes on immigration reform this year and Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has vowed to never bring the bipartisan reform package that passed the Senate earlier this year up for consideration on the House floor.

The president said he was willing to work with the piecemeal approach the House GOP has said it will pursue, likely after the deadline for candidates to pose primary challenges passes early next year, as long as all the parts are there.

“If this Congress doesn’t get immigration reform done, then a lot of us are going to work as hard as we can to elect a Congress in 2014 that will,” Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, told USA Today.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The National Memo
  • sigrid28

    I don’t see the newly minted compassionate conservative Paul Ryan–or conservatives of any stripe–sitting down and discussing policies with these protestors any time soon, let along lifting even a finger to pass immigration reform, a bill (or ensemble of bills) that would help 11 million people. Yet what the president and Mrs. Obama have done is a peaceful and generous act that elevates the point these protestors are making in the context of a national discourse, despite the fact that the sacrifices of these hunger strikers will be ignored by all Republicans and have almost no chance of success.

    • charleo1

      You don’t see any, “Compassionate Conservatives,” because they died out,
      and became extinct in the Republican Party. It was back during the Reagan Administration, they used the money they had earmarked for compassionate activities, to build extra swimming pools on the longer yachts, their exploding
      bank accounts forced them to buy. So as they will explain, if asked. It was
      all quite regrettable, but alas, unavoidable. Like the dysfunction in their Party
      today. The truth is, they have been forced by an American public, who came to see their policies as regressive, mean spirited, and in some cases making absolutely no sense at all. To cobble together, alongside their selfish, it’s all about me constituency, with an assortment of cynics, anti-government nut jobs, and fundamentalists, who insist people actually lived at one time, like Fred and Wilma Flintstone. Right along side the Plateosarus Fred drove at the lime quarry. Now none of these groups have much of anything in common with each other, except by accident. Like when the anti-government wing don’t want the government to give away food, to hungry people, and the, it’s all about me crowd, don’t want to pay for it. The anti- government people figure feeding people might undermine their opinion that government is evil. And the corporate group believe with some evidence to back them up, that if the government didn’t feed the hungry, then food would become a minimum wage they could finally support. Within reason of course, and the poor still have to do the cooking, and cleaning up.

      • Dominick Vila

        Well said!

    • Dominick Vila

      I agree. The most likely response by House Republicans, besides indifference, will be to demonize the President’s decision and continue to do everything they can to preserve an immigration law that, in some ways, resemble South Africa’s apartheid policies.
      I understand why our immigration law encourages foreign professionals to come to the United States, and gives them a fast path to citizenship, but I think it is reprehensible for the same law to erect barriers – and Berlin style walls – to prevent semi-skilled workers whose labor is desperately needed in sectors of our economy such as the agri-business, hospitality, garment, and construction to stay in business, realize a profits, and ultimately benefit our population at large by keeping prices affordable.
      The latter becomes pervasive when we consider the problems our dwindling middle class is facing as a result of a socio-economic system that helps the rich get richer, helps our corporations accumulate wealth that is often invested abroad, and at the expense of our workforce and American consumers.