AP sources: Immunity offered to certain immigrants (by Obama)

[Doug_Steele]

Congress is supposed to make laws and substantive policies like this and the executive branch enforce it, not what obama did today - WHICH HE SAID WAS ILLEGAL LAST YEAR. 


So did the law change from last year to where what this jerk said was illegal last year is legal now?  hhhhmmmmmmm?

All immigration services were absorbed into the Department of Homeland Security in 2003 when DHS enveloped Immigration and Naturalization Services. DHS is a cabinet department established by President George W. Bush, under the control of the executive branch, for the purpose of organizing numerous different executive branch agencies into one department. Included in this department are Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), among others. There's no constitutional issue, because Congress has no claim on any part of DHS or the executive branch's decision-making here.

[OzmO]

thanks George

[Straw Man]

Brilliant argument there, Einstein, you're truly the genius voice of a generation.

LOL

[Soul Crusher]

LOL

HEY IDIOT - THIS IS FROM OBAMA LAST YEAR
________________________ ______________________ 




Obama on DREAM Act: Can't "just change the laws unilaterally" Transcript (Flashback Sept. 28, 2011)
 Chicago Sun Times ^ | Sept. 28, 2011 | Lynn Sweet

Posted on Friday, June 15, 2012 12:03

Obama on the DREAM Act: "I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there's been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It's just not true."

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

[Soul Crusher]

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/09/obama_on_dream_act_cant_just_c.html


Hey Obama cultists - last year he said this was illegal to do! 

[kcballer]

So they have to blame Bush for allowing the executive office this kind of power? hahahaha

[Soul Crusher]

So they have to blame Bush for allowing the executive office this kind of power? hahahaha

No - bush did not try to do this via EO.  He tried to get a law passed the way a law normally gets passed - not by dictatorial FIAT! 



Again - why do you leftists so desire a king?  Move to North Korea if you want a dictator. 

[Straw Man]

OBAMA TO BLACK PEOPLE  -     D R O P     D E A D  

how did your disease addled brain arrive at this conclusion

[Soul Crusher]

how did your disease addled brain arrive at this conclusion

Guuess who is hurt the worst by this. 
 

[Straw Man]

Guuess who is hurt the worst by this. 

no one

[Soul Crusher]

no one

So fucking delusional you are. 

[Soul Crusher]

The President Flouts The Law [His Action Shows "Contempt For Our Laws"]
Washington Post ^ | June 15, 2012 | Ed Rogers
Posted on June 15, 2012 5:28:07 PM EDT by Steelfish

The President Flouts The Law By Ed Rogers

Apparently, there are no limits to what the president will do to get himself reelected. There is evidence that he will manipulate the law in favor of pet causes and supporters, as in the case of Solyndra. His administration might be guilty of breaking the law, as shown by the leaks of classified national security information. And now, President Obama holds himself above the law on immigration.

Today’s executive order, granting work permits and immunity from deportation to young illegal immigrants, is not an example of the president using his authority; it’s a scandal involving the president performing a selfish act in furtherance of currying favor with a special-interest group.

Obama has acknowledged that what he did today would require a new law, or at least changes to the current law. But instead of waiting on either, he has decided to rule by fiat. This is not a show of strength; it’s an act of arrogance of rare severity.

Before you can even get to the question of whether this is good policy or if it invites more illegal immigration, you can see that the president’s actions today ignore some of the Constitution’s fundamental tenets. Yesterday, I spoke about the gall the president displayed in his so-called economic speech, which was full of gratuitous pledges and the selective retelling of history. Today’s actions go beyond gall, showing contempt for our laws.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

[Straw Man]

So fucking delusional you are. 

these people have been here for years and many are probably doing jobs that most of us would not do

why do you assume that if they left that black people would suddenly want those jobs.

[avxo]

I have every problem with this.

WE HAVE A LEGAL IMMIGRATION PROGRAM  we need to use it, not grant amnesty to the children of LEECHES without congressional approval.

I agree with you in principle, but to be fair, our legal immigration program is horribly broken; that's hardly a reason for breaking the law, and I'm not stating it as an excuse. Just stating a fact.

Now, I don't believe grants of amnesty make sense - in fact, I would find it very difficult to agree with any program that includes amnesty. But I have to admit that the issue of people who have lived their entire lives in the United States in the United States (having been brought here as children through no fault of their own) is one of the areas where we, as a nation, need to sit down, take a deep breath, and try to address.

I guess I would be ok with allowing such individuals (not the parents who brought the child; just the child itself) under some circumstances. Off the top of my head, if they (a) are attending an accredited college or University in pursuit of an undergraduate degree and maintain at least a 3.0 GPA, or (b) are attending a University in pursuit of a graduate or post-graduate degree, or (c) own a business which is properly registered under the laws of the State and employs at least 5 people, or (d) have joined the United States Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard.

Are these somewhat arbitrary? Yeah. As I said, it's criteria that, off the top of my head, would probably sell me on a limited one-time program. Some may scream and say I'm supporting amnesty and blah blah blah. Perhaps I am, although I really don't see it that way.

[garebear]

This is despicable. But, it shows just how desperate this goof of a president is.

333386 said it best. I hope Obama get absolutely DESTROYED in November, not just a loss, but a complete Rodney-King-style BEATDOWN.[/[/glow]b]

Are you black?

If so, why would you side with a known racist against black people and post something like this?

Honestly, that sounds like something a KKK member would say.

[OzmO]

I agree with you in principle, but to be fair, our legal immigration program is horribly broken; that's hardly a reason for breaking the law, and I'm not stating it as an excuse. Just stating a fact.

Now, I don't believe grants of amnesty make sense - in fact, I would find it very difficult to agree with any program that includes amnesty. But I have to admit that the issue of people who have lived their entire lives in the United States in the United States (having been brought here as children through no fault of their own) is one of the areas where we, as a nation, need to sit down, take a deep breath, and try to address.

I guess I would be ok with allowing such individuals (not the parents who brought the child; just the child itself) under some circumstances. Off the top of my head, if they (a) are attending an accredited college or University in pursuit of an undergraduate degree and maintain at least a 3.0 GPA, or (b) are attending a University in pursuit of a graduate or post-graduate degree, or (c) own a business which is properly registered under the laws of the State and employs at least 5 people, or (d) have joined the United States Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard.

Are these somewhat arbitrary? Yeah. As I said, it's criteria that, off the top of my head, would probably sell me on a limited one-time program. Some may scream and say I'm supporting amnesty and blah blah blah. Perhaps I am, although I really don't see it that way.

i agree the children are more the victims here.  But, it doesn't make much sense to grant the children amnesty when their parents are still breaking the law.   It makes even less sense to do this if we aren't willing to actually follow our laws and enforce our borders, deport and severely penalize companies who hire illegals.

 If we are not going to follow our own laws why do i have to show my passport every time i re-enter the country? 

[avxo]

i agree the children are more the victims here.  But, it doesn't make much sense to grant the children amnesty when their parents are still breaking the law.   It makes even less sense to do this if we aren't willing to actually follow our laws and enforce our borders, deport and severely penalize companies who hire illegals.

We certainly need immigration reform, and we absolutely need to set up some kind of system to remove those who are here illegally. Really, at this point any system would be better that what we are currently doing - since we're practically doing nothing. Personally, I would not want amnesty for anyone that knowingly and willingly broke the law to get here. I'm more ambivalent about those who were brought here through no fault of their own and who may not even know that they're in the country illegally.

When it comes down to it, it's not an easy problem to solve, which makes those who try to pass it off as simple even more frustrating. I think that we can come up with something reasonable and strike a balance. Personally, I would be OK if that balance allowed a subset of those who were brought here as children through no fault of their own and which met certain requirements to either become citizens or be granted a green card, and I think that good arguments can be made for which this would be a sensible and useful approach.

Regardless of what plan is put into effect, it absolutely must include some provision that makes it clear this is a one-time thing. Unfortunately, under the current jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, Congress cannot bind future Congresses, so no law could be written that had an immutable "and this time we mean it" provision, short of some kind of Constitutional Amendment that codified that in the Constitution itself.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/09/obama_on_dream_act_cant_just_c.html


Hey Obama cultists - last year he said this was illegal to do! 

Its not legal to hand them citizenship without congressional approval....however its not illegal for him to tell immigration services not to pursue certain groups and quite frankly, I think its a great idea because its a serious drain on the economy.  It cost 27,000 dollars just to deport 1 person......1 person plus we are losing tax money that we could be collecting.    Something had to be done and Congress wasn't doing shit so Obama took care of it.


Fact is that the GOP has been stalling for over 4 years on laws making the recovery very slow....this will create an influx of taxpayer cash and save a great deal on the budget....they are here anyway so at this point, it makes no difference

[Hugo Chavez]

if that's true, there should be an investigation into why a bus ride to the border costs 27,000.  Yea I know there is more to it than that but it shouldn't be that fucking much!

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

if that's true, there should be an investigation into why a bus ride to the border costs 27,000.  Yea I know there is more to it than that but it shouldn't be that fucking much!

Food, clothing, medical expenses, legal cost, employees, jailing, paperwork, transportation etc......you just can't shove them on a bus and ship them back like cargo

[Hugo Chavez]

Food, clothing, medical expenses, legal cost, employees, jailing, paperwork, transportation etc......you just can't shove them on a bus and ship them back like cargo

I don't see why not.  It's a better trip than the one they took here and they got all kinds of shit they were not entitled to while here.  And a bus ride is not treating them like cargo. 

[War-Horse]

Hmmm good point. Article says almost 400,000 people were deported last year under the obama administration. At 27,000k per, we need a better answer to this.  Perhaps the felons could get a bus ride back and not the working mom cleaning hotel rooms everyday. Ive personally seen this happen to the children and its gutwrenching.

Nowget ready for the "They knew it could happen so its their fault"! crowd. Totally skipping the solution and fastforwarding to the hatred of people rant as is common with so called christians.

[tonymctones]

no legislation needs to even be talked about before we have the ability to manage the inflow. Right now we dont have the ability to stop anyone from coming in if they want to.

By doing this all we are doing is advertising that coming here illegally if you meet the requirements obammers sets forth will be ok...

[GigantorX]

A solution has to deal with 2 main things

1.)Enforcement of immigration laws and enforcement of the border

2.)Dealing with illegals already in the country.

In my opinion you would have to do 1 first followed closely by 2. Get rid of those with a serious criminal history (don't kick out those with a speeding ticket 2 years ago), a work history, education history etc. Try to start an assimilation program with teaching language, laws, expectations etc. You fuck up during that period, you're out.

We will have to admit to ourselves that this or any solution will not be perfect  and that some that should get booted will stay and some that should stay will get booted.

The whole amnesty thing was tried in the 80's  amnesty was granted, there was  chest beating and sermons from the mount about how "this time will be different" and then nothing was  enforced, it was  laughed at boy those in power, the illegals  still came over both borders and across the bodies of water and we are now revisiting it all again  20 years later except now it is a much bigger problem.

The government is hooked on Illegal immigration, though. They love the low wages, cheap labor, voting block and they help prop up social security and such.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

I don't see why not.  It's a better trip than the one they took here and they got all kinds of shit they were not entitled to while here.  And a bus ride is not treating them like cargo. 

Its inhumane and it will still cost money....plus it makes international relations difficult....we still do business with Mexico