The Economist published an opinion about Barack Obama’s executive order that will shelter some undocumented immigrants. In the article, The Economist correctly highlights the festering political problems destroying America today, but in the end make the claim that Obama’s executive action marks the end of any hope for bi-partisanship in Washington.
The Economist is making a straw-that-breaks-the-camel’s-back argument. And it is ludicrous. Never mind six years of Republican obstruction that precede this, right?
We cannot forget that the GOP has made obstruction a matter of policy. Republican politicians campaign on the promise. Like the camel that carried countless straws before the proverbial last, American politics has borne the weight of countless efforts by Republicans to stand in Obama’s way. Now we are to accept that this action by Obama will destroy any chance for future bipartisan debate.
Even if this is true — although it is hard to know how one would tell — is it President Obama’s fault? There’s an underlying fatalism in this sort of thinking that rewards intransigence. If the only way things are going to get done is one-sided there is no room for debate anyway.
There is a plain and clear problem in the United States. It is the Republican Party, especially its radical, regressive leadership. And that cannot be blamed on a Democratic president.