P.P.S.: To support his scathing indictment, Balz says "Voters wanted an immigration deal ... ." I know a respected robo-poller who disagrees.
P.P.P.S.: The Post really needs Edsall back. ... 2:04 A.M. link
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Cloture fails, 50-45. Immigration bill pulled off floor by Sen. Reid. ... It can't really be about how many amendments Republicans get to offer. ... Alternative: Maybe it's about not being able to take the worst ideas from the left (instant legalization of illegals) and the right (second class guest workers), put them together, call it centrism, bask in fawning MSM coverage and ram it down the throat of voters who don't want it! ... P.S.: Sen. Feinstein says the problem is people "never understood the complexities of the bill." I don't think so! ...
Of course, the bill isn't dead. Just resting. There will be an instinctive, goo goo guilt-tripping MSM effort to induce its revival. ('The system isn't working ... bipartisanship,' etc.)** It could well come back. This is no time for gloating. ... O.K., maybe a little gloating:
"Backers of Immigration Bill More Optimistic Lawmakers Cite Sense of Urgency"-- Washington Post, last Monday.
As with the LAT's stories about California Gov. Gray Davis' growing confidence heading into his recall election, I don't think this story simply looks embarrassing, given subsequent events. I think it was BS at the time it was written. The Post's reporter was either willingly or (more likely) cluelessly spun by his pro-bill sources, ignoring the impact public opposition to the "grand bargain" over the recess was having.
"Why Amnesty Makes Sense"- Time cover story, released today.
Hmm. Maybe editor Rick Stengel wishes he hadn't switched to publishing on Fridays instead of Mondays. Not that the article isn't as timely and provocative as ever!
"I'm ... pessimistic about the chances of blocking the [Senate]immigration bill with so-called Killer Amendments"-- kausfiles, June 5 [E.A.]
What do bloggers know? I also thought Dems wouldn't endanger the bill by emasculating the provisions Republicans liked ("Majority Overreach"). But maybe the Dems, too, are not that unhappy to see the bill fail. [How can its failure help both Dems and GOPS? Isn't control of Congress a zero sum game?--ed It is. But incumbents also have an interest in keeping their individual seats--and that's a game both Dem and GOP incumbents and incumbents can win. They win it, in part, by avoiding votes that might anger lopsided majorities of voters! The conspicuous public opposition to the bill (not just from conservatives) over the past few weeks may have triggered an early onset of this useful self-preservationist instinct.
Hey, Republicans! I know a way to take that divisive issue of the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill off the table.' Kill it! On a muddled procedural vote! Before a weekend! ... See NR's argument. 2:17 P.M.
"the 'fix' is in, with the compromise coalition and the White House fashioning some complicated amendment that will eliminate some conservative improvements, and fix the Dorgan amendment that jeopardizes GOP support."