The list of fake excuses for holding up immigration reform in Congress is growing even longer and faster than Pinocchio's nose. First we had all the Border Security (BS). Obama couldn't be trusted to stop more brown-skinned people from coming over in Mexico - ergo, legalizing 11 million immigrants who were already here would never work.

That argument disappeared pretty fast when the Senate voted to throw away $46.3 billion on a high tech border boondoggle for well heeled defense contractors in its CIR bill.

Next was Boston - Obama couldn't be trusted to catch terrorists, so legalizing 11 million immigrants would never work.

Then we had Benghazi - Obama couldn't be trusted to protect US consulates overseas, so legalizing 11 million immigrants would never work.

After that, we had the government shutdown and reopening. Obama couldn't be trusted to negotiate with the Republicans in a way that would satisfy Ted Cruz and his Tea Party radicals - so legalizing 11 million immigrants would never work.

Get the picture? And those are only a few of the excuses that have been bandied about for the House's refusal to take on the right wing bigots in the GOP and allow a vote on CIR.

Did I leave anything out? Oh yes, Syria - I almost forgot.

Now comes the latest addition to the FEFKR (Fake Excuses For Killing Reform) list: Obamacare. Politico, which has top immigration reporters and should know better, is running a December 17 article called Immigration's next hurdle: Obamacare

dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=9E4221E7-D3A8-4D3C-8BC8-522019995CBD

Writing about the initially failed Affordable Care Act website rollout, Politico says:

"That the public may be more skeptical of the federal government's capacity to run big programs effectively and efficiently is something that conservatives will surely hold up as a reason not to expand the government's footprint well into the future - setting up another hurdle for reform advocates to clear."


Never mind that immigration reform supporters are trying to put an end to, or at least drastically reduce, one of the biggest, most expensive, damaging, inefficient, destructive and morally indefensible US big government programs of all time - Obama's deportations approaching two million people in only five years of his presidency so far.

If Obama couldn't get his act together well enough to save four American lives at Benghazi, why should we allow him to kick 11 million people out of the country?

Funny, but I have never heard any right wing, "small government" supporters, who claim to be against "tyranny through executive power" make that argument. I wonder why not.