Waiting for the punchline? There isn’t one.
This isn’t a satirical article, ala The Onion. Nor is it a joke.
Liberal websites Gawker, the Huffington Post, and Democratic Underground are actually pushing the conspiracy theory that Mitt Romney dyed his face brown for an interview on Univision, in an attempt to appeal to Latino voters.
Here’s the Gawker write-up:
Mitt Romney currently trails President Obama among registered Latino voters by nearly 40%, and getting caught saying things like “it would be helpful to be Latino” certainly isn’t helping.
But has it gotten so bad that Romney is now resorting to “brownface” in order to make himself more appealing to Univision viewers? Democratic Underground has looked at the photo above from last night’s “presidential forum”and concluded that, yes, Romney definitely “dyed his face brown.”
I would imagine it has to actually physically hurt a person to be this level of stupid.
Of course, these liberal sites do not necessarily concentrate their stupidity on any one group, they tend to spread it around.
Remember when the Huffington Post was accusing a Hillary Clinton ad of darkening the face of Barack Obama to make him look more ‘threatening’?
President Obama has issued a “deferred action” executive order which will halt the deportation of some younger illegal immigrants, providing them government issued work permits, and by extension granting them amnesty to stay in the United States despite their illegal means of entry.
The policy bypasses Congress, a tactic the President has used repeatedly, and achieves the goals set forth by the DREAM Act, a plan that creates a path to citizenship for young people who entered the country illegally, but have attended college or served in the military.
If you’re wondering about the motivation for such a move, don’t. It is, much like his gay marriage ‘evolution’, a politically calculated move.
Via the Associated Press:
The Obama administration will stop deporting and begin granting work permits to younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives. The election-year initiative addresses a top priority of an influential Latino electorate that has been vocal in its opposition to administration deportation policies.
The policy change, described to The Associated Press by two senior administration officials, will affect as many as 800,000 immigrants who have lived in fear of deportation. It also bypasses Congress and partially achieves the goals of the so-called DREAM Act, a long-sought but never enacted plan to establish a path toward citizenship for young people who came to the United States illegally but who have attended college or served in the military.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was to announce the new policy Friday, one week before President Barack Obama plans to address the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ annual conference in Orlando, Fla. Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney is scheduled to speak to the group on Thursday.
Granting amnesty to illegals has long been a goal of the administration and the Democrats in general. Illegals, individuals with no regard for United States immigration law (or in some circles, the Democrat base), may be the only path to victory for President Obama in 2012.
And it has been in the works for some time. Take the case of Eliseo Medina, for example.
Medina previously served as a member of Obama’s National Latino Advisory Council and as honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America. As such, he used the platform of an America’s Future Now! Conference in 2009 to outline a plan for long-term Democrat rule through blanket amnesty.
“We reform the immigration laws; it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. If we have eight million new voters who care about, and will be voting, we will be creating a governing coalition for the long term.”
Think about that. Democrats are trying to use people with no regard for U.S. law, to create a long-term reign of government in the United States.
Not surprisingly, Medina is a strong advocate for the DREAM Act. In September of 2010, Medina sent an email to supporters expressing staunch support for the DREAM Act amnesty bill.
“It’s essential we urge all Senators to vote yes on the DREAM Act amendment,” he wrote.
The email fittingly closed with the phrase, “¡Si se puede!” or “Yes we can!”
Also not surprisingly, around the same time Medina was hatching this plan, Obama was also pushing for non-legislative routes to amnesty via a memo between staff and the director of the Citizenship and Immigration Service. In that memo was a revelation that the department was reviewing viable substitutes for comprehensive immigration reform; including rewriting legal opinions and reviewing executive orders, among other mechanisms for amnesty.
Of course, when confronted about that memo the USCIS basically laughed it off saying, ‘nothing to see here…‘
Part of their statement:
“Nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions.”
And yet, here we are today, three years after this memo, granting amnesty via executive order.
Republicans in Congress responded to the memo via a letter to President Obama, part of which read:
“… the administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.”
What Republicans sometime forget is that the rule of law often trumps the political will for re-election in this administration. While this may seem like amnesty and a dangerous immigration policy to most, it is simply a voter registration drive to the Democrats.
At some point, the Obama administration will have officially played the race card so much, that it will become completely irrelevant. How we haven’t hit that point yet is beyond me – but if Obama himself is using it, then his internal polling is indicating it’s effectiveness.
Via White House Dossier:
At a Washington fundraiser Monday night, President Obama subtly played the race card, suggesting that Republican presidential candidates would deny people opportunity based on the color of their skin.
The post then goes on to demonstrate three separate occasions in which either President Obama,or Michelle Obama, tried hinting that Republican Presidential candidates would deny people opportunity based on skin color or class.
First, the President at a Washington fundraiser:
Everything we fought for during the last election is at stake in this election. The very core of what this country stands for is on the line — the basic promise that no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, this is a place where you could make it if you try. The notion that we’re all in this together, that we look out for one another — that’s at stake in this election. Don’t take my word for it. Watch some of these debates that have been going on up in New Hampshire.
Then, to a Latino group in October:
I believe America should be a place where you can always make it if you try; a place where every child, no matter what they look like, where they come from, should have a chance to succeed . . . I still believe in that America. I believe we can be that America again.
And finally Michelle during another October fundraiser:
Will we be a country where opportunity is limited to just the few at the top? Or will we give every child — every child — a chance to succeed, no matter where she’s from, or what she looks like, or how much money her parents are? Who are we? That’s what’s at stake here.
If only Republicans govern with looks, race, and class in mind, then why is it the President who is always talking about looks, race, and class?