The El Paso speech is notable not for breaking any new ground on immigration but for perfectly illustrating Obama’s political style: the professorial, almost therapeutic, invitation to civil discourse, wrapped around the basest of rhetorical devices — charges of malice compounded with accusations of bad faith. “They’ll never be satisfied,” said Obama about border control. “And I understand that. That’s politics.” How understanding. The other side plays “politics,” Obama acts in the public interest. Their eyes are on poll numbers, political power, the next election; Obama’s rest fixedly on the little children.It's a pattern. How about the motive of job creation based on market demand?
This impugning of motives is an Obama constant.
His campaign guru David Axelrod is back in Chicago and clearly this is a tactic to stir up populist passions. On the day of the Chicago TaxDay TEA Party Axelrod sent over some astroturf minions to picket Boeing's Chicago HQ:
backyardconserv Anne Leary Boeing targeted by left:RT @JimPethokoukis: RT @TomBevanRCP: The biggest news of the day that isn't on the front page. http://nyti.ms/g1J0Nu
backyardconserv Anne Leary Kos, union org protests in Chicago on taxday. Who's coordinating:Shaming Corporations on their taxes - Protesting Boeing dailykos.com/story/2011/04/…
backyardconserv Anne Leary Illinois wooed Boeing to move HQ from Seattle, nowRT @Ricochet: Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Obama to Boeing: Drop Deadhttp://bit.ly/gtrNYM #tcotThe other part of the scheme is to threaten business and their employees with lost contracts and lost jobs by demanding to know political contributions--a radical invasion of privacy. It's another Chicago Machine style shakedown. Shake down and attack motives, rather than deal with substance:
Steve Chapman's weekend Chicago Tribune column:
No, you are not hallucinating. If the NLRB succeeds, a federal official will command a private corporation it may not produce in one place and must produce in another. Never mind what makes business sense.
Americans may see the movie, may read the book, but the proof is in Americans voting with their feet.This is a radical departure for the agency. "It is highly unusual," noted The New York Times, "for the federal government to seek to reverse a corporate decision as important as the location of a plant."No kidding. It rests on the premise that this company is obligated to remain hostage to a contentious union. It assumes that government officials are entitled to dictate the choices of people whose capital is at risk. And you wonder why the late Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged" is selling briskly?
Unions clearly realize this too.
Mr. President, tear down this wall.
P.S. And God Bless America:)