The MSM, ever defending liberals, can find nothing wrong with Mr. Obama's demand that Congress fully fund his ability to conduct his amnesty operations even as a federal judge has ruled it improper, but report with glee at how badly the GOP looks for not wanting to fund the illegal immigration EO. It's enough to make me think Alice in Wonderland is a documentary. The GOP does have a solution they could employ which could both serve their own purposes and, perhaps, get Mr. Obama's agreement. But it relies upon a faith I am not sure should any longer exist: Judicial integrity.
It seems a useful media question would be why Democrats demand DHS funding be allowed to operate such an amnesty scheme given a federal judge ruling it illegal, but useful media questions seem few and far between. The GOP, realistically speaking, will surrender now or surrender later. They lack the Bully Pulpit and a favorable media, and enough of the American electorate doesn't care anyhow about the "why" issue, and so they will capitulate. But there exists a way to help the GOP and, perhaps, put this on the back of Mr. Obama, where it properly resides anyhow.
The GOP should offer a DHS funding bill which excludes the use of federal money to operate Mr. Obama's amnesty program which is presently enjoined anyhow, but add a rider to the bill which would free up those funds for that use--despite GOP opposition to the program--once the judicial question about legality is answered. Should Mr. Obama prevail, and I hope he fails given his own claims he lacked the Constitutional authority to do what he now says he has the Constitutional authority to do (things that make you go hmmmm, unless you're a Democrat) then it would be for voters and GOP candidates to prevail. I would hope our Constitution and laws would, but we have at least one entire party adrift of them and I see no way to convince those leftists to return to some degree of legal sanity.
If the courts rule that Mr. Obama is, in fact, violating the law, or the Constitution, then he would lack the ability to operate the program in any event, and so a "clean" bill would be a moot point. This conditional bill makes the most political sense. And it might even cause some reporters, the most incurious people it often seems, to wonder why it is a president would veto a bill which would give him what he wants if the courts rule he is correct.