• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP sources: Immunity offered to certain immigrants

The bottom line question that should be asked here is this, Has Obama overstepped his authority in waiving his magic pen and declaring this subverting the authority of congress? And, Are we in Revolutionary times?

Victor Davis Hanson thinks so....

Are We in Revolutionary Times?
By Victor Davis Hanson
June 15, 2012 6:51 P.M. Comments28
Legally, President Obama has reiterated the principle that he can pick and choose which U.S. laws he wishes to enforce (see his decision to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, his decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and his administration’s contempt for national-security confidentiality and Senate and House subpoenas to the attorney general). If one individual can decide to exempt nearly a million residents from the law — when he most certainly could not get the law amended or repealed through proper legislative or judicial action — then what can he not do? Obama is turning out to be the most subversive chief executive in terms of eroding U.S. law since Richard Nixon.

Politically, Obama calculates that some polls showing the current likely Hispanic support for him in the high 50s or low 60s would not provide enough of a margin in critical states such as Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado, or perhaps also in Florida and Virginia, to counteract the growing slippage of the independent vote and the energy of the clinger/tea-party activists. Thus, what was not legal or advisable in 2009, 2010, or 2011, suddenly has become critical in mid-2012. No doubt free green cards will quickly lead to citizenship and a million new voters. Will it work politically? Obama must assume lots of things: that all Hispanics vote as a block in favoring exempting more illegal aliens from the law, and are without worry that the high unemployment rate hits their community among the hardest; that black voters, stung by his gay-marriage stance, will not resent what may be seen as de facto amnesty, possibly endangering his tiny (and slipping) lead in places like Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. And because polls show overwhelming resistance to non-enforcement of immigration law, Obama also figures that the minority who supports his recent action does so far more vehemently than the majority who opposes it. Time will tell; but my gut feeling is that his brazen act will enrage far more than it will delight — and for a variety of different reasons. As with all his special-interest efforts — the Keystone cancellation, war-on-women ploy, gay-marriage turnabout, and now de facto amnesty — Obama believes dividing Americans along class, ethnic, gender, and cultural lines will result in a cobbled together majority, far more preferable than a 1996 Clinton-like effort to win over the independents by forging a bipartisan consensus.

Are We in Revolutionary Times? - By Victor Davis Hanson - The Corner - National Review Online

This current administration is not only the most arrogant in history, but IMHO, the most dangerous to our Constitution, and way of life.

j-mac
 
The bottom line question that should be asked here is this, Has Obama overstepped his authority in waiving his magic pen and declaring this subverting the authority of congress? And, Are we in Revolutionary times?

Victor Davis Hanson thinks so....



This current administration is not only the most arrogant in history, but IMHO, the most dangerous to our Constitution, and way of life.

j-mac

If he is re-elected will there be impeachment hearings?
 
The bottom line question that should be asked here is this, Has Obama overstepped his authority in waiving his magic pen and declaring this subverting the authority of congress? And, Are we in Revolutionary times?

Victor Davis Hanson thinks so....



This current administration is not only the most arrogant in history, but IMHO, the most dangerous to our Constitution, and way of life.

j-mac

Well, it's not like he issued a signing statement saying that he intends to ignore the law. Seems to me conservatives didn't have a problem with this between 2000 and 2008. :roll:
 
I'm wondering why Romney still hasn't come out saying that he would reverse this decision.
 
I'm wondering why Romney still hasn't come out saying that he would reverse this decision.

Because Romney is for all three sides of almost any issue, yet somewhat against it too. ;-)
 
If he is re-elected will there be impeachment hearings?

That's a good question. Our current cryer of the house hasn't had the cojones to go after his abuse of power so far, I don't really know if he would should Obama continue on the destroy America tour.

j-mac
 
how would this law attract more illegals?

new illegals won't be covered by this new rule.

It signals a lack of serious enforcement of EXISTING immigration law, and a trend toward even less enforcement in the future. With 11 to 15 million illegal aliens already here, the odds of any new additions being discovered, much less actually being deported, go way down. This occurs in many high crime neighborhoods now, once the slide starts, its acceleration gets much harder to stop.
 
Last edited:
That's a good question. Our current cryer of the house hasn't had the cojones to go after his abuse of power so far, I don't really know if he would should Obama continue on the destroy America tour.

j-mac

By all means, Republicans, go ahead and make a political circus with some Obama impeachment hearings.
 
By all means, Republicans, go ahead and make a political circus with some Obama impeachment hearings.

LOL. Yep, since it is going so well with the Solyndra, fast & fuzzy, GSA and the WH "leak" investigations, we need more "swift and sure" action out of our congressional morons. ;-)
 
By all means, Republicans, go ahead and make a political circus with some Obama impeachment hearings.
What would they impeach him for? The fact is that as chief executive, he can decide who to prosecute and not to prosecute. It's done all the time. For example the government chose to prosecute John Edwards, but they could have chose not to. Completely legal and above board.
 
What would they impeach him for? The fact is that as chief executive, he can decide who to prosecute and not to prosecute. It's done all the time. For example the government chose to prosecute John Edwards, but they could have chose not to. Completely legal and above board.


Be careful there dude, there is a lot right on the edge that is being looked at now. Should Obama win in November, the heat is coming....Mark my words. This doofus has subverted the Constitution at every turn, and it will bite him in the ass if he continues to act like a dictator wanna be.

j-mac
 
So it has nothing to do with stepped up enforcement and border security. That would indicate to me that there's no point in further boosting enforcement and border security, because those efforts have NO effect.

Yeah, except that he's only done so using a system set up despite his predecessor's hesitation. And no, he hasn't stepped up border security. He has what he inherited. It's still a revolving door at the border. Try National Geographic's Border Patrol, you'll see what they're working with and against.
 
Be careful there dude, there is a lot right on the edge that is being looked at now. Should Obama win in November, the heat is coming....Mark my words. This doofus has subverted the Constitution at every turn, and it will bite him in the ass if he continues to act like a dictator wanna be.

j-mac
Let it come, the President as chief executive can decide who to prosecute and not prosecute. Bring it on.
 
Let it come, the President as chief executive can decide who to prosecute and not prosecute. Bring it on.

What are you saying here? That the President decides if impeachment is brought? If so, I think you should go back and study the process.

j-mac
 
Read this:

On “Fox News Sunday,” Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said Obama’s moved successfully undercut both Rubio and Romney.

“This was the anti-Marco Rubio initiative by the administration,” Kristol said. “They were scared. Sen. Rubio was about to introduce his version of the Dream Act, which would have been closer to what President Obama announced than the actual Democratic Dream Act. I wish Rubio had introduced it over the last month or two. He got stalled, not every Republican was on board, the Romney campaign’s been cautious about it.”


Romney dodges immigration questions - POLITICO.com
 
The Xenophobic far-right is having a hissy fit.

Especially the fat ones who don't work and live off disability or some other gov handout.

Seems hardworking immigrants and those wishing to finish college are making some voters (TB) look bad.
 
Read this:

On “Fox News Sunday,” Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said Obama’s moved successfully undercut both Rubio and Romney.

“This was the anti-Marco Rubio initiative by the administration,” Kristol said. “They were scared. Sen. Rubio was about to introduce his version of the Dream Act, which would have been closer to what President Obama announced than the actual Democratic Dream Act. I wish Rubio had introduced it over the last month or two. He got stalled, not every Republican was on board, the Romney campaign’s been cautious about it.”


Romney dodges immigration questions - POLITICO.com


I actually saw this when it aired. If that is the case, what a cold, cynical, and transparent ploy from Obama. I hope hispanics look at this and don't let Obama use them as distraction from what a failure his term has been.

j-mac
 
The Xenophobic far-right is having a hissy fit.

Good God man, have you no shame at all? What kind of debate do you really expect by opening up your posting with such a vile diatribe?

Especially the fat ones who don't work and live off disability or some other gov handout.

You must have these people mixed up with liberal/progressives.

Seems hardworking immigrants and those wishing to finish college are making some voters (TB) look bad.

Not at all. See, I consider my self a TEA party member, and I actually think that what Obama is talking about is ok. The only problems I have with it is the manner in which he did it, and the cynical way in which he is using the hispanic population.

j-mac
 
The Xenophobic far-right is having a hissy fit.

So then your fine when the role is reversed and the next Republican president bypasses congress & hands out dictates
that not only ignore our laws but may help to re-elect him then? Speaking of hissy fits how about the commie left throwing one big one when they had take cuts from Walker? They may be able to bus supporters from the Chicago area to protest but they cant vote can they? :lamo

Especially the fat ones who don't work and live off disability or some other gov handout.
Except for the fact that I really dont know many so called right wingers that sponge off the goverment, most of them
are Liberals who feel they are entitled to it.

Seems hardworking immigrants and those wishing to finish college are making some voters (TB) look bad.

If they are so hardworking & smart then maybe we should bring more into the Naperville area to compete with your children for jobs.
Or maybe the local taxpayer (that'd be you) could pay more taxes & send some of these fine young immigrants to your local college to possibly take your kids spot.
 
So then your fine when the role is reversed and the next Republican president bypasses congress & hands out dictates that not only ignore our laws but may help to re-elect him then?

Well, they always do of course. Every administration decides how strongly or weakly to go after different things. Bush, for example, ludicrously underenforced environmental statues and statues regulating wall street. Heck, he put a guy from a paper company in charge of the department of the interior and loaded up the EPA with oil men.

But, to be clear, Obama isn't ignoring the will of Congress. Everybody in Congress agrees that the current situation with immigration is totally effed. It's just that the Republicans broke Congress so now it can't do anything anymore. All he is doing is minimizing the harm done by the gridlock. This is exactly why Congress gave the executive prosecutorial discretion. Because it only has finite resources and it needs to figure out how to use them most efficiently, which is exactly what it is doing.
 
Last edited:
But, to be clear, Obama isn't ignoring the will of Congress. Everybody in Congress agrees that the current situation with immigration is totally effed. It's just that the Republicans broke Congress so now it can't do anything anymore. All he is doing is minimizing the harm done by the gridlock. This is exactly why Congress gave the executive prosecutorial discretion. Because it only has finite resources and it needs to figure out how to use them most efficiently, which is exactly what it is doing.

Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!!! The President is not a king, he can NOT decide that congress is taking too long, or any other BS excuse to subvert the Constitutional powers of his office.

j-mac
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!!! The President is not a king, he can NOT decide that congress is taking too long, or any other BS excuse to subvert the Constitutional powers of his office.

The power to execute the law is given to the president in the constitution, not to the Congress. Prosecutorial discretion is part of that power. That has been thoroughly established in the courts for many decades.

I think you just don't get the most basic elements of what is going on. ICE has finite resources. It has to choose where to spend them. Obviously it doesn't have enough resources to catch and deport every single undocumented immigrant, right? So it needs to prioritize. Rather than focusing resources on trying to catch folks who didn't even come here of their own volition and who aren't causing any trouble, ICE wants to focus on the highest priority targets. People that are committing other crimes are the top of the list, but people who came here of their own volition are also obviously higher priority than people who didn't, right?
 
News from The Associated Press



Gotta free 'em up so they can vote!

I'd be embarassed to pander and kiss ass like this. Democrats have no shame, expecially in an election year. They fight against voter ID, then grant immunity to illegals. Could that agenda be any more obvious?

And don't you love how the Associate Press refers to them as "certain immigrants" in the headline, instead of illegal immigrants?


Please point out where this PURPOSED POLICY will give them voting right by Nov?


The ignorant impotent outrage of the right on this story is pathetic.
 
The power to execute the law is given to the president in the constitution, not to the Congress. Prosecutorial discretion is part of that power. That has been thoroughly established in the courts for many decades.

I think you just don't get the most basic elements of what is going on. ICE has finite resources. It has to choose where to spend them. Obviously it doesn't have enough resources to catch and deport every single undocumented immigrant, right? So it needs to prioritize. Rather than focusing resources on trying to catch folks who didn't even come here of their own volition and who aren't causing any trouble, ICE wants to focus on the highest priority targets. People that are committing other crimes are the top of the list, but people who came here of their own volition are also obviously higher priority than people who didn't, right?


It is not so much an outrage of what he did, but in the manner in which he did it that is what is going to get him in hot water.

j-mac
 
Back
Top Bottom