We have come to expect it - sound and fury, grandstanding, political theater and politicians placing power above the good of the nation.
Flush with their recent smashing midterm victory, Repub-licans claim that the nation voted in opposition to President Barack Obama, for "change," and an end to gridlock. This is an ironic interpretation considering the early Republican vow to oppose anything and everything the president would propose, including a plan to make health insurance affordable to previously uninsured Americans - a private sector-oriented plan that incorporates the basic features of what Republicans of a decade ago said they favored.
So now the immigration brouhaha. A Senate immigration bill with bipartisan cooperation sat on House Speaker John Boehner's desk because his hardliner Republicans didn't want him to bring it up for a vote. Meanwhile, the president correctly repeated many times that he could not fix the issue without an act of Congress.
He could have issued some executive orders to temporarily address some matters, but he deferred prior to the midterm elections. Republicans and pundits of the chattering class inform us that he deferred because he didn't want to put Senate Democrats at greater risk during the midterm elections. That's one interpretation, and why should we be shocked, shocked, that politics are going on in Washington?
A more benign interpretation is that had he issued the executive orders prior to the midterm elections, Democratic losses would have been blamed on the president and his executive orders on immigration, thereby making any progress on immigration legislation even more difficult to achieve after the election.
Rightly or wrongly, take your choice, the president held off on the executive orders.
So now the election - Democrats who didn't have a message lose to Republicans who didn't need a message. With historic inaction and Republican recalcitrance, the president faces increased pressure to "do something," on immigration, if only through executive orders.
Glowing with their predictable Republican victory, Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, acting as if they are now masters of the universe, immediately order the president to do nothing, lest he "poison the well."
Predictably, the president immediately issues the executive orders.
Just as predictably, pundits, including heavyweights on NPR who should know better, echo the Republican talking points, repeating that the president has "poked the Republicans in the eye," and "poisoned the well." Sometimes I wonder what those clones that make their living jacking their jaws, repeating clichés, and reinforcing each other's ignorance, get paid for.
Look, we're dealing with alpha male behavior here. If the first tough guy publicly throws down the gauntlet before the second tough guy, the second tough guy has no choice but to pick it up. Who poked who in the eye first depends on your interpretation.
Let's mix a few metaphors here. These two gloating alpha males, Boehner and McConnell, push the loser into a corner, poke the president in the eye, and throw down the gauntlet. Their grandstanding stunt backfires. The president, also an alpha male, and no dummy, picks up the gauntlet, slaps the bullies in the face with it, pokes 'em back in the eye, and puts the Republicans in a box of their own making.
The whole motley crew of Republicans is now in total disarray, milling around like a bunch of cattle and screaming like spoiled children who can't have their way.
Senator Cruz vows to block every single one of the president's nominees from here on. Hold on now - can they really block more nominees than the record number they have already blocked - and be more obstinate than they have been already?
A few Republican governors, including our own Scott Walker, who labors under the illusion that he is presidential timber, are threatening to "sue the president." Good luck with that!
New Jersey's bombastic governor, Chris Christie, still uncertain who he wants to offend least, is uncharacteristically circumspect - probably hoping the problem will go away.
Others, including former Florida governor Jeb Bush, and Ohio's John Kasich, doubtlessly looking to 2016, urge congressional Republicans to be responsible. Good luck with that, too. Of the Republican cabal, Boehner has by far the toughest job on his hands, to corral hardliners from safe gerrymandered Republican districts to get on board if the House is to propose anything constructive that the president might sign. In contrast, senators have to take a broader, statewide approach, thus having more incentive to work across the aisle.
We can expect plenty of debate over the legality, as opposed to raw politics, of the executive orders. While executive orders have been used by all presidents, the implications of the current executive orders that protect many immigrants from immediate deportation are, arguably, greater, and have broader reach than most executive orders, at least in terms of numbers of people involved.
Even the politics of the issue are not as clear as the "analysts" who claim to know about this stuff lead us to believe. Not all Hispanics are on the same page regarding immigration. And some Republicans, such as employers who hire immigrants, have a stake in clarity on immigration issues.
So between distinguishing between process and politics of the executive orders, the noise of political theater, and mindless repetitive clichés of the chattering class, it can all sound rather complicated. And this brouhaha will be going on for some time to come.
Let's simplify it. The president's executive orders only address a portion of immigration issues. They are temporary. Come January, Republicans control the Congress. No more excuses.
Do what you were elected to do - stop screaming, go to work, legislate.
And send the president a bill!
-John Waelti's column appears every Friday in the Times. He can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.
Flush with their recent smashing midterm victory, Repub-licans claim that the nation voted in opposition to President Barack Obama, for "change," and an end to gridlock. This is an ironic interpretation considering the early Republican vow to oppose anything and everything the president would propose, including a plan to make health insurance affordable to previously uninsured Americans - a private sector-oriented plan that incorporates the basic features of what Republicans of a decade ago said they favored.
So now the immigration brouhaha. A Senate immigration bill with bipartisan cooperation sat on House Speaker John Boehner's desk because his hardliner Republicans didn't want him to bring it up for a vote. Meanwhile, the president correctly repeated many times that he could not fix the issue without an act of Congress.
He could have issued some executive orders to temporarily address some matters, but he deferred prior to the midterm elections. Republicans and pundits of the chattering class inform us that he deferred because he didn't want to put Senate Democrats at greater risk during the midterm elections. That's one interpretation, and why should we be shocked, shocked, that politics are going on in Washington?
A more benign interpretation is that had he issued the executive orders prior to the midterm elections, Democratic losses would have been blamed on the president and his executive orders on immigration, thereby making any progress on immigration legislation even more difficult to achieve after the election.
Rightly or wrongly, take your choice, the president held off on the executive orders.
So now the election - Democrats who didn't have a message lose to Republicans who didn't need a message. With historic inaction and Republican recalcitrance, the president faces increased pressure to "do something," on immigration, if only through executive orders.
Glowing with their predictable Republican victory, Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, acting as if they are now masters of the universe, immediately order the president to do nothing, lest he "poison the well."
Predictably, the president immediately issues the executive orders.
Just as predictably, pundits, including heavyweights on NPR who should know better, echo the Republican talking points, repeating that the president has "poked the Republicans in the eye," and "poisoned the well." Sometimes I wonder what those clones that make their living jacking their jaws, repeating clichés, and reinforcing each other's ignorance, get paid for.
Look, we're dealing with alpha male behavior here. If the first tough guy publicly throws down the gauntlet before the second tough guy, the second tough guy has no choice but to pick it up. Who poked who in the eye first depends on your interpretation.
Let's mix a few metaphors here. These two gloating alpha males, Boehner and McConnell, push the loser into a corner, poke the president in the eye, and throw down the gauntlet. Their grandstanding stunt backfires. The president, also an alpha male, and no dummy, picks up the gauntlet, slaps the bullies in the face with it, pokes 'em back in the eye, and puts the Republicans in a box of their own making.
The whole motley crew of Republicans is now in total disarray, milling around like a bunch of cattle and screaming like spoiled children who can't have their way.
Senator Cruz vows to block every single one of the president's nominees from here on. Hold on now - can they really block more nominees than the record number they have already blocked - and be more obstinate than they have been already?
A few Republican governors, including our own Scott Walker, who labors under the illusion that he is presidential timber, are threatening to "sue the president." Good luck with that!
New Jersey's bombastic governor, Chris Christie, still uncertain who he wants to offend least, is uncharacteristically circumspect - probably hoping the problem will go away.
Others, including former Florida governor Jeb Bush, and Ohio's John Kasich, doubtlessly looking to 2016, urge congressional Republicans to be responsible. Good luck with that, too. Of the Republican cabal, Boehner has by far the toughest job on his hands, to corral hardliners from safe gerrymandered Republican districts to get on board if the House is to propose anything constructive that the president might sign. In contrast, senators have to take a broader, statewide approach, thus having more incentive to work across the aisle.
We can expect plenty of debate over the legality, as opposed to raw politics, of the executive orders. While executive orders have been used by all presidents, the implications of the current executive orders that protect many immigrants from immediate deportation are, arguably, greater, and have broader reach than most executive orders, at least in terms of numbers of people involved.
Even the politics of the issue are not as clear as the "analysts" who claim to know about this stuff lead us to believe. Not all Hispanics are on the same page regarding immigration. And some Republicans, such as employers who hire immigrants, have a stake in clarity on immigration issues.
So between distinguishing between process and politics of the executive orders, the noise of political theater, and mindless repetitive clichés of the chattering class, it can all sound rather complicated. And this brouhaha will be going on for some time to come.
Let's simplify it. The president's executive orders only address a portion of immigration issues. They are temporary. Come January, Republicans control the Congress. No more excuses.
Do what you were elected to do - stop screaming, go to work, legislate.
And send the president a bill!
-John Waelti's column appears every Friday in the Times. He can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.
