16 Jun 12
I'm surprised nobody's started a thread about this, yet.
Personally, I support the goal even if I'm hesitant to embrace the means.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-06-15/obama-immigration/55613364/1?loc=interstitialskip
Ignoring complaints from congressional Republicans, the Obama administration announced today that it would halt deportations of up to 800,000 illegal immigrants who were brought to the country as children.
In recent years, congressional Democrats have tried and failed to pass the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants who were brought to the USA as children and have completed high school and either attended college or served in the military.
The administration's decision, announced by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano this morning, does not grant legal status to those DREAM students but halts any deportation proceedings against them for two years and allows them to apply for a work permit.
While announcing the new policy, President Obama called DREAM-eligible students, or DREAMers, Americans "in every single way but one: on paper."
"This is not amnesty. This is not immunity. This is not a path to citizenship. It's not a permanent fix," Obama said. "This is a temporary, stopgap measure that lets us focus our resources wisely while giving a degree of relief and hope to … patriotic young people.
"It's the right thing to do," he said.
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by wittywonkaWhy can't he just hault deportations indefinately and just write an Executive order anytime he does not like the laws on the books?
I'm surprised nobody's started a thread about this, yet.
Personally, I support the goal even if I'm hesitant to embrace the means.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-06-15/obama-immigration/55613364/1?loc=interstitialskip
Ignoring complaints from congressional Republicans, the Obama administration announced today that it would hal ...[text shortened]... ief and hope to … patriotic young people.
"It's the right thing to do," he said.
Originally posted by whodeyObama's predecessor, Bush, used Executive Orders far more often than Obama has, and yet you never once criticized the Republican president for doing so. This suggests that it isn't Executive Orders that you have an objection to.
Why can't he just hault deportations indefinately and just write an Executive order anytime he does not like the laws on the books?
As for your 'satirical' question, President Obama's administration has deported more people than previous administrations [and less people are coming in than before] and he isn't proposing to halt all deportations indefinitely. So that's the end of your straw man.
Why not comment on the announced policy? He proposes to halt deportations of up to 800,000 illegal immigrants who were brought to the country as children, who have lived there ever since, who are under 30, have been enrolled in education, and who have no criminal records.
Do you disagree with this policy? Do you think these specific people should be arrested and deported?
16 Jun 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFOf course I have a problem with any President using Executive Orders, especially when they contradict laws on the books. No doubt, Romney will do the same and I treat him the same.
Obama's predecessor, Bush, used Executive Orders far more often than Obama has, and yet you never once criticized the Republican president for doing so. This suggests that it isn't Executive Orders that you have an objection to.
As for your 'satirical' question, President Obama's administration has deported more people than previous administrations [and less ree with this policy? Do you think these specific people should be arrested and deported?
This is just an indication of how dysfunctional and broken government has become regardless of how you view the issue. The checks and balances of the US government are but a memory. Now all that matters is what the President wishes to do. If you agree with him great!!! If not, then that is just too bad.
So why not just turn the President into a king? It would save a great deal in money by giving Congress the boot, especially since they defer governing to the Executive Branch time and time again anyway. Just open a few more departements and hire a few more czars then off they go.
Now getting to this particular issue, if you make all of the illegals legal, you still have the problem of illegal immigration unless you just pass a law stating that once they cross the border they are legals. And just for the record, I see absolutely no difference between "W" and Obama on the issue. In fact, I'm sure "W" supports the Dream Act. All globalists do.
16 Jun 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe hell you say!! 😲
Obama is obviously trying to score some cheap votes. Nevertheless, the plan sounds reasonable to me, although the implementation of a civil registry would make things much simpler.
So now he can appeal to those that do not like illegal immigration stating that he has deported more than "W" while also appealing to those that support the Dream Act. I wonder if he stays up at night wondering what it would be like to have a soul?
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by whodeyIt's a problem you discovered you had, apparently, only when Obama took office. You never once criticized the previous Republican president for using them even though he did so far more often than the current administration has.
Of course I have a problem with any President using Executive Orders, especially when they contradict laws on the books.
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by whodeyThese are clumsy straw men, whodey. Obama is not "mak[ing] all of the illegals legal", as you well know. And he isn't passing a law that says "once [immigrants] cross the border they are legals", as you well know.
Now getting to this particular issue, if you make all of the illegals legal, you still have the problem of illegal immigration unless you just pass a law stating that once they cross the border they are legals.
Why won't you comment specifically on the announced policy?
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by FMFNow you're dreaming. There was tremendous grass roots opposition to Bush's amnesty plans, which resulted in its defeat.
It's a problem you discovered you had, apparently, only when Obama took office. You never once criticized the previous Republican president for using them even though he did so far more often than the current administration has.
I've written on this forum criticizing Reagan's previous amnesty.
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by FMFHe has done what he said himself the President could not legally do.
These are clumsy straw men, whodey. Obama is not "mak[ing] all of the illegals legal", as you well know. And he isn't passing a law that says "once [immigrants] cross the border they are legals", as you well know.
Why won't you comment specifically on the announced policy?
16 Jun 12
Originally posted by FMFThe election of one Barak Obama has been an awakening to many. It has awakened us to the abuse of power and just how screwed up the federal government is. Things will never be the same after him. Really Obama is just an empty suit in retrospect. He is no different that "W".
It's a problem you discovered you had, apparently, only when Obama took office. You never once criticized the previous Republican president for using them even though he did so far more often than the current administration has.
