Free Markets, Free People

Who Does Obama Represent Anyway?

When the office of President was created in 1787, its primary function was to be the face and voice of the nation to the world. Above all else, the executive branch represents Americans in the diplomatic and, when necessary, martial contexts to friend and foe alike. Given the foregoing, what exactly are we to make of Obama aligning himself with Mexican President Felipe Calderon against citizens of the United States?

Mexican President Felipe Calderón, arriving at the White House for a state visit, wasted no time today criticizing Arizona’s new immigration law as unfair and discriminatory.

The law makes it illegal to be in the United States without permission, and requires police to demand documentation from anyone suspected of doing so [ed. – Wrong, on both assertions]. Such a law, Calderón asserted at a Rose Garden news conference with President Barack Obama, will subject Mexican citizens to discrimination and was created so that people who “work and provide things to this nation will be treated as criminals.”

Obama also condemned the law, and left open the possibility he’ll try to block it.

Leaving aside the editorializing about Arizona’s law in this “reporting,” it’s a bit puzzling as to what Calderon is even complaining about. First of all, his country has far more draconian laws regarding illegal immigration than the U.S. Secondly, there is a real question regarding whom he thinks he represents. As Allahpundit noted:

I’m not sure which Mexicans Calderon’s presuming to speak for. If he means Mexican citizens who are in the country legally, fair enough. If he means illegals, i.e. if he’s actually complaining on behalf of people who aren’t even supposed to be here, his balls are even brassier than I thought. And if he means Americans of Mexican descent, he’s belittling Obama’s own authority. Last time I checked, if anyone’s going to do any diplomatic conveying on behalf of U.S. citizens, it’s the president of the United States.

What’s really sad is that, of the two heads of state, Calderon is the only one actually looking for the interests of his own people. For his part, Obama stood firmly against his own citizens and with the interests of another country:

President Obama left little doubt Wednesday that his administration will challenge Arizona’s divisive new immigration law, saying the measure “has the potential of being applied in a discriminatory fashion.”

After a private meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon in the Oval Office, Obama denounced the state law cracking down on illegal immigration, and he also sent a clear message that a review led by Justice Department lawyers is likely to culminate in legal action.

Obama said that “a fair reading of the language of the statute” suggests those who appear to be illegal immigrants could be “harassed or arrested.”

Er, wouldn’t a “fair reading” involve, y’know, actually reading the law? To date, no one in the Obama Administration has bothered to do so, although they have all been quite ready to castigate it anyway.

The truly disturbing thing, however, is the sheer abdication loyalty (not to mention responsibility) on the part of our chief executive, by taking a hostile stance against those whom Obama (nominally) represents, all in support of the interests of the foreign nation most responsible for our border mess in the first place. It’s almost as if Obama thinks he represents the rest of the world in its dealing with Americans.

Perhaps, when Obama finally gets around to reading SB-1070, someone should slip a copy of the Constitution in there as well. He seems to have forgotten about … if he ever cared in the first place.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

11 Responses to Who Does Obama Represent Anyway?

  • Welcome to the wonderful world of ethnic nationalism.  Especially when it trumps loyalty to country and there is an active externally based nation that the ethnic nationalists feel connected with. 

    In other words citizenship is a formality. 

  • It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when the head of a failed state like Mexico can come to the WHITE HOUSE and criticize something about this country while standing next to the POTUS.  Leaving aside the terrible manners and statecraft  from this piece of garbage,  it says a lot about Baracky that the guy felt comfy enough to do that.

  • Whoa! Hold on there pardner! Is someone saying that Holder and Napolitano are actually going to READ the law now?  Too radical, it will never work.  I mean, what happens if they actually read it and then have to report “uh, oh shit sir, there’s nothing we can do about this”.
    My God!  We just need to give Imeme the powers of a dictator for a few years because there are too many people who may have good intentions, but they’re stopping important progress that Imeme is trying to make for the good of our country (Viva Mexcio! Viva Woody Allen!)

  • Since they have shown they are not willing to do anything about the problem, I think Arizona should immediately sue the President, AG, DHS, ICE, CBP, and any other dept even remotely mandated by law to control the invasion.

  • This is what happens when intolerant “ism” religionists take over a country. It is precisely the reason the First Amendment was written. These people have been making laws to establish their religion for decades now.

  • In a recent poll respondents were asked if they thought illegal immigration was bad for the U.S.

    51% said yes
    49% said No entiendo inglés

  • Out of curiosity, what laws DON’T have the “potential of being applied in a discriminatory fashion”?  Is it not a common complaint of victim-mongers like The Justice Brothers that the drug laws are discriminatory?  Or of CAIR and like-minded groups that anti-terrorism laws are discriminatory?  If the police are looking for a suspected thief, rapist, murderer, etc. who is described as a [insert non-white ethnic group here], is THAT not “discriminatory”?

    If there’s a silver lining in this cloud, it’s that (so far) the American people don’t seem to be buying it.  The real marker will be whether or not other states pass laws like Arizona’s.  The left is having their way right now in the media because they can essentially isolate and personalize the issue: “Arizona is racist!” That will become harder and harder to do if more states follow Phoenix’s lead.  However, the cynic in me thinks that Phoenix will knuckle under and repeal the law.

    As for Imeme and Calderon, I can’t help but feel that this ultimately does them and their cause considerable damage:

    1.  Americans don’t appreciate being hectored by foreigners, ESPECIALLY when said foreigner is standing in the Rose Garden bashing on our country

    2.  Americans don’t appreciate seeing their own president bashing on our country

    3.  Americans, many of whom are out of work, underwater on their mortgages, and otherwise in financial distress, don’t appreciate the spectacle of Dear Leader spending flippin’ great wads of cash on rare herbs for a huge White House dinner complete with butterflies, a tent the size of the Rose Bowl, etc.  This must really rankle pro-Israeli Americans considering the shabby treatment meted out to Netanyahu when he came to visit.  For that matter, one wonders if certain people in (for example) London and Warsaw are wondering what the hell makes Mexico so damned special.

  • “Democrat RI lawmaker files immigration bill that follows Arizona’s law”

    PROVIDENCE, R.I. — State Rep. Peter Palumbo, D-District 16, Cranston, has filed a bill that largely copies a controversial Arizona law considered the toughest immigration legislation in the country.

    Palumbo’s bill, like the Arizona law, makes failure to carry alien registration cards a state crime, and requires police to question people “where reasonable suspicion exists” that the person is unlawfully in the United States.

    The bill, H 8142, filed Tuesday, also targets people who hire illegal immigrants, or who knowingly transport them.

    Much of Palumbo’s bill is taken verbatim from the Arizona bill, SB 1070, which was signed into law by Governor Jan Brewer last month, over President Obama’s objections.

  • Calderon was told to make that speech to help Obama. I am sure that it makes Mexican-Americans of the “don’t disrespect us on our national day” happy too. Dems probably get votes and turn out based on this stuff from their base. So they can’t read the bill or do any compromising – demagogue this until November will be the way they play it. Good on Wolf Blittzer for asking Calderon about Mexico’s immigration laws.
    The next step would be a group of Americans in 4WD vehicles cross the border, drive close to some city and set up a mobile hot dog stand. Let’s see how long it its before they get deported.