In the newz today (via Memeorandum):
—- While Karl Rove sympathizes with the rationale behind the bill, he said yesterday, “I think there is going to be some constitutional problems with the bill … I wished they hadn’t passed it, in a way.”
—- Jeb Bush thinks handling illegal immigration should remain a federal issue to tackle: “I think it creates unintended consequences,” he said in a telephone interview with POLITICO Tuesday. “It’s difficult for me to imagine how you’re going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well …I don’t think this is the proper approach.”
—- Senator Lindsey Graham:
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) said Tuesday he thinks Arizona’s new immigration law is unconstitutional and that “it doesn’t represent the best way forward” when it comes to addressing illegal immigration.
He added, however, that the law reflects “what good people will do” when they are left with no other options.
Speaking at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing today with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Graham said Congress eventually needs to tackle immigration reform but that it will be “impossible” to achieve reform until citizens in states like Arizona feel that the borders are secure.
“In this environment there is no hope of it passing,” he said.
Graham’s steadfast opposition to tackling immigration “reform” during an election year due to valid concerns that Democrats are trying to use the issue for political gain appears to have influenced Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to “amend” his Senate priorities, with immigration “reform” no longer standing front and center on the immediate radar – for the time being, anyway.
—- The most measured statement from a prominent GOP public official comes from GOP candidate for Senate Marco Rubio – no fan of “amnesty,” who expressed concerns about the bill both from a law enforcement angle as well as a Hispanic angle in a statement yesterday but stopped short of saying he opposed it, contra to Ben Smith’s assertions that Rubio’s statement equated to him “opposing” the bill.
—- Reuters has published a sympathetic piece towards illegal immigrants in AZ but unintentionally notes that the law is already having the desired effect of making illegals weigh their options as to whether or not to stay here or go back to Mexico.
—- With President Obama onboard as a full-blown critic of the bill, AG Eric Holder is hinting around that the US could issue a court challenge to the Arizona law, while Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano is complaining about already “stretched” ICE resources. Of course the Obama administration doesn’t want any individual state to handle what he believes los federales should (as is the case with, well, every issue in this administration) …
And speaking of President Obama, does a bigger liar not exist in the Democrat party?
OTTUMWA, IA — Asked about his plan for undocumented workers at a town hall this evening in Ottumwa, IA, President Obama referred to “this law that just passed in Arizona which I think is a poorly conceived law.”
The president said, “you can try to make it really tough on people who look like they, quote, unquote look like illegal immigrants. One of the things that the law says is that local officials are allow to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers — but you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.”
“That’s not the right way to go,” the president said to the crowd at Indian Hills Community College.
What absolutely shameful (and unsurprising) racial demagoguery, demagoguery for which he should be called out on. The MSM, of course, won’t, but conservative pundits will. Which leads me to:
—- National Review’s Rich Lowry decries the “hysteria” – and tries to clear up some of the questions – surrounding some of the more rabid critiques of the bill, most of them coming from The Usual Suspects on the left. The Washington Examiner’s Byron York is on a similar path with his defense of the bill here. Please consider both pieces must-reads.
—- Last but not least, how does Mexico treat its illegals? Michelle Malkin has the lowdown here.