Barack Obama sold illegal immigration to a fifth-grader and revealed that his concern is with obtaining votes, not protecting the U.S. against terrorist infiltration.
I urge everyone to go to public appearances by Obama and other politicians and ask them difficult questions about their actions and statements. Then, upload their response here.
A fifth-grader asked Barack Obama this question at an Iowa appearance:
~~"When you're elected president, what if like the illegal immigrants start to take action and start bombing and stuff?"~~
Obama said he didn't want to get "too complicated", but perhaps he should have. He went on to promote illegal immigration and first downplayed the threat of terrorist infiltration then - 10 seconds later - admitted it was a possibility. Note also ABC News' spin; rather than doing real reporting they, like Obama, are promoting illegal immigration.
There are two possible interpretations of the question: terrorism or insurrection.
In the first case, tens of thousands of illegal aliens from "Special Interest" countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, S.A., etc.) have been released into the U.S.
Illegal aliens with links to terrorist groups have been caught not just at the border but after having been in the U.S. for months. Smuggling rings for Middle Easterners have been broken up at the northern and southern border.
It's less likely, but the question might have been refering to the possibility of some form of insurrection. Andres Oppenheimer of the Miami Herald warned of a "Hispanic intifada" unless immigration "reform" passes.
And, John McCain warned of Paris-style riots unless immigration "reform" passes.
Needless to say, McCain and Oppenheimer are both establishment figures and are not considered fringe.
Obama didn't want to "get too complicated", so, rather than discussing all those issues that it's his job to be concerned about, he simply went on to promote illegal immigration to the kid.
Progressives might want to note that meatpacking jobs used to be higher-waged, unionized jobs before those companies were allowed to engage in union-busting by importing illegal aliens.
Then, after an audience member prompts him, Obama gets in a non-sequitur about Mitt Romney.
Does the fact that a lawn company that Mitt Romney contracted with apparently employed illegal aliens mean that Romney can't oppose illegal immigration? Apparently Obama thinks so, despite that being a logical fallacy.
Then, Obama first downplays the threat of terrorist infiltration.
Just 10 seconds later, he admits it's a possibility.
By doing so, he's also admitting that it was a possibility all during his term in office:
Since he admits that terrorist infiltration is a possibility, why is he waiting for "reform" - which might never be realized - to press for border security? Why would we have to wait years for Obama to secure the border?
The answer is that Obama is corrupt.
Those coming over the borders illegally are mostly future Democratic voters. The fact that criminals and perhaps even terrorists are also coming over the borders is of little concern to Obama.
Since Obama is willing to support ignoring our immigration laws now in order to gain power, what makes anyone think he'd suddenly start enforcing our laws after "reform"? Millions of potential illegal aliens would be a constant temptation to him & others.Wouldn't Obama and the other Democrats make the same calculation they make now?
Wouldn't they allow future illegal immigration, just as long as most of those coming might one day vote for Democrats?
Almost every elected Democrat and many of the groups that have influence over that party (ACLU, NCLR, MALDEF, etc.) opposes or even tries to subvert enforcement of our immigration laws now. Some are funded by companies that profit from illegal immigration.
They aren't going to suddenly start supporting enforcement after "reform".
In fact, after "reform", they'd have even more political power from which to oppose enforcement.
Then, it's on to guilt-tripping the kid into supporting a massive amnesty.