washingtonexaminer.com
OPINION
By: Gregory Kane
Examiner Columnist
01/08/12 8:05 PM

Let's call it exactly what it is: the most craven caving in to political pressure ever by an American president.

And, yes, since we have only one in office at a time, I can only be referring to Barack Hussein Obama.

In 2010, we had Mexican President Felipe Calderon visiting the United States and presuming to lecture Americans about the "unfairness" of our immigration laws.

Specifically, Calderon had much to say about Arizona's SB 1070, a law that would prevent folks from, say, his country from slipping across the border and traipsing around our country anytime they pleased.

Did President Obama take Calderon to task and tell him not to butt into America's internal affairs? Did he dare suggest that Mexico's immigration laws are even more draconian than our own?

No. It actually took Calderon himself to do that. When a reporter asked him how his country handled illegal immigrants, Calderon gave his now-famous answer:

"We send back them."

According to a story in the Los Angeles Times on Friday, the Obama administration has "sent back them" illegal immigrants in greater numbers than any of his predecessors.

Given the president's most recent immigration policy announcement, you have to wonder who held what gun to his head to get him to do that.

The latest Obama strategy for tackling the illegal-immigration dilemma is another moment of "Duh!" that the president no doubt thinks is a stroke of genius. It's akin to the policy the Obama administration took last year.

Not all illegal immigrants would be deported, the administration announced. Only those who are felons or otherwise threats to public safety.

Excuse me?

Now when a cop stops me for speeding, or running a red light or a stop sign, he or she doesn't cut me a break because I'm neither a felon nor a public safety threat. I take the ticket and pay the consequences.

I get no pass on breaking the law. Neither do other Americans, either those born here or those who entered the country legally and became naturalized citizens.

Obama tells people who've entered the country illegally that they get a free pass on breaking the law if they're neither felons nor public safety threats. Does anybody detect an issue of basic fairness here? Or, more specifically, a lack of it?

Not Obama, and not his fellow Democrats. Their latest attempt to appease the open-borders bunch and the Mexico-first lobby calls for abolishing the rule that says illegal immigrants who want to apply for legal status in the United States have to leave the country first, and enter the country the right way.

The exceptions would be those illegal immigrants who would experience "family hardship" if they had to leave their loved ones to return home and comply with American law.

Now the curmudgeon in me says that if someone who entered this country illegally is really serious about becoming an American citizen, then complying with the old rule should have been a sacrifice he or she would willingly, and even gladly, make.

That doesn't sit well with Democrats, the party of "give 'em an advantage, don't let 'em earn an advantage." So now Americans are stuck with this new "family hardship" policy when it comes to illegal immigrants.

But this question has to be asked: With this new rule, what illegal immigrants in their right minds are not going to claim "family hardship"?

Absolutely none. And, despite the "record numbers," according to the Los Angeles Times story, of illegal immigrants that the Obama administration has deported, the new policy will just inspire a new wave of illegals, not fewer.

Looks like Obama is prepared to welcome a new voting bloc of undocumented Democrats.

Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinio...#ixzz1ivym6KVe