• 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!

Obama to take executive action on immigration

Montecresto said:
You too miss the point. Of course the house and senate prosecute the process, and of course impeachment has legal and constitutional basis. But Americans, and members of the House and Senate are Americans, too, don't hold there presidents accountable. Just look around DP. It's a daily orgasmic frenzy of right wingers piling on Obama, and mostly correctly pointing out wrong doing, even unconstitutional action. And the partisan lefties are wore plum out by them, justifying, defending and excusing their president. I'm talking about partisan democrats in the house and senate as well. The exact opposite was the case during the last administration. If a GOPer should happen to win the WH next go around, stay tuned, because you will see a complete roll reversal on this board. Very few here acknowledge the sins of presidents from both parties, and want to see an end to corruption in Washington. Same being true across the country and the reason that it persists, and likely never will end.
Click to expand...

I think that you are assigning too much power to the public. Look at the Clinton impeachment. The American public who paid attention to it saw it largely as amusement. There was no outrage. It was a show trial. Nobody really cared about it other than Lindsay Graham and a few other congresscritters. It was a lesson learned in congress that unless there is serious public outrage it's not worth the effort. Because impeachment is a political process and not a criminal proceeding and Americans are largely disengaged politically it's going to take something really extraordinary to make it happen again.

In addition, nobody in congress really wants to see our first black president recorded in history as being impeached.
 
As stated in his statement, he will try to identify additional actions his administration can take within his existing legal authorities to deal with that problem. It's clear that the type of actions that will be taken will be limited at some extent. I am wondering which type of actions will he take? Is it going to be providing those who are here illegally legal status?
 
poweRob said:
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/history/35th/thelaw/irca.html

That's the link I've found closest to what you are talking about. What part where you referring to?
Click to expand...


SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT AND "8 USC 1101 note" SERVICE ACTIVITIES OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE.

(a) TWO ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS. -- It is the sense of Congress that two essential elements of the program of immigration control established by this Act are --

(1) an increase in the border patrol and other inspection and enforcement activities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and of other appropriate Federal agencies in order to prevent and deter the illegal entry of aliens into the United States and the violation of the terms of their entry, and

(2) an increase in examinations and other service activities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and other appropriate Federal agencies in order to ensure prompt and efficient adjudication of petitions and applications provided for under the Immigration and Nationality Act. "8 USC 1101 note"

basically as i remember it, he okayed the bill because he was promised that we would finally close off the border

he gave amnesty to those already here, IF congress agreed to block anymore from coming

now, we know completely shutting it off is nearly impossible, but allowing 300-400k undocumented aliens to cross annually is nowhere close to closed
 
sawdust said:
I think that you are assigning too much power to the public. Look at the Clinton impeachment. The American public who paid attention to it saw it largely as amusement. There was no outrage. It was a show trial. Nobody really cared about it other than Lindsay Graham and a few other congresscritters. It was a lesson learned in congress that unless there is serious public outrage it's not worth the effort. Because impeachment is a political process and not a criminal proceeding and Americans are largely disengaged politically it's going to take something really extraordinary to make it happen again.

In addition, nobody in congress really wants to see our first black president recorded in history as being impeached.
Click to expand...

Well first, there was no outrage over the Clinton impeachment because of the reason they were trying to impeach him, hardly injurious to national interest, our constitution, etc. as to Obama, his skin color should be irrelevant if he has violated our nations laws and his oath of office.
 
poweRob said:
Reagan did it back then as his way of weakening union labor strength.

on another note... it's corporate America that is the carrot that these people come here for. And when I finally see Republicans embracing laws in mass to throw these white collars in prison instead of attacking the brown people lured here by them... I'll then start believing Republicans give a damn about anything regarding immigration.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
gdgyva said:
SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT AND "8 USC 1101 note" SERVICE ACTIVITIES OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE.

(a) TWO ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS. -- It is the sense of Congress that two essential elements of the program of immigration control established by this Act are --

(1) an increase in the border patrol and other inspection and enforcement activities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and of other appropriate Federal agencies in order to prevent and deter the illegal entry of aliens into the United States and the violation of the terms of their entry, and

(2) an increase in examinations and other service activities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and other appropriate Federal agencies in order to ensure prompt and efficient adjudication of petitions and applications provided for under the Immigration and Nationality Act. "8 USC 1101 note"

basically as i remember it, he okayed the bill because he was promised that we would finally close off the border

he gave amnesty to those already here, IF congress agreed to block anymore from coming

now, we know completely shutting it off is nearly impossible, but allowing 300-400k undocumented aliens to cross annually is nowhere close to closed
Click to expand...


Really? What does "close off the border" mean to you?
 
j-mac said:
His problem is he can't legally.
Click to expand...

Just as many people viewed many things Bush did as illegal, partisan support was sufficient to provide him an avenue. The same will be the case here. There won't be enough people who agree that what he does (or has done) is illegal. The hazards of blind partisan support that all presidents enjoy.
 
Montecresto said:
Just as many people viewed many things Bush did as illegal, partisan support was sufficient to provide him an avenue. The same will be the case here. There won't be enough people who agree that what he does (or has done) is illegal. The hazards of blind partisan support that all presidents enjoy.
Click to expand...

it's going to be funny when the next guy/gal gets into office, and their views counter yours

with the precedents that this administration has set as far as not following the law, or circumventing the law, or making it up as they go.....

think of what a libertarian or a conservative will do.....

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.....

you think they are going to go back to playing the game the right way? nfw

new rules are now set.....

enjoy them while you have them.....

you may not like things as much later
 
j-mac said:
His problem is he can't legally.
Click to expand...

While limited, there are things he CAN do legally with executive orders. Obama is very good at skirting the legal line and he will push it as far as he can.
 
gdgyva said:
it's going to be funny when the next guy/gal gets into office, and their views counter yours

with the precedents that this administration has set as far as not following the law, or circumventing the law, or making it up as they go.....

think of what a libertarian or a conservative will do.....

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.....

you think they are going to go back to playing the game the right way? nfw

new rules are now set.....

enjoy them while you have them.....

you may not like things as much later
Click to expand...

This is why it is such a dangerous game the Dems are playing. I think they are playing ALL their cards in the hopes they win the presidency in 2016.

I simply cannot phathom why they think it is such a good idea for a president to have that much power without it being kept in check.
 
gdgyva said:
what does "prevent and deter the illegal entry of aliens into the united states" mean to you?
Click to expand...

A wink wink, nod nod. No administration has ever been SERIOUS about border security!
 
TheNextEra said:
This is why it is such a dangerous game the Dems are playing. I think they are playing ALL their cards in the hopes they win the presidency in 2016.

I simply cannot phathom why they think it is such a good idea for a president to have that much power without it being kept in check.
Click to expand...

It's the same thing so many wondered when Bush was running amuck.
 
TheNextEra said:
While limited, there are things he CAN do legally with executive orders. Obama is very good at skirting the legal line and he will push it as far as he can.
Click to expand...

Not unlike all presidents do.
 
Montecresto said:
Not unlike all presidents do.
Click to expand...

Correct, this isn't just an Obama thing although one could argue the scope of Obama's XO have been far reaching. They continue worse with each administration.
 
gdgyva said:
it's going to be funny when the next guy/gal gets into office, and their views counter yours

with the precedents that this administration has set as far as not following the law, or circumventing the law, or making it up as they go.....

think of what a libertarian or a conservative will do.....

whats good for the goose is good for the gander.....

you think they are going to go back to playing the game the right way? nfw

new rules are now set.....

enjoy them while you have them.....

you may not like things as much later
Click to expand...

Not at all, you and I agree on this. The "imperial presidency" the, "I'm the decider president" the, "my job would be a whole lot easier if I were a dictator, presidency was protected by GOPer partisans and this president picked up where he left off. Partisan protection for this president too, will ensure more of the same in the next presidency whether we have another smart ass or a dumb elephant, partisanship is the problem. Presidents will do whatever they are allowed to do!!
 
TheNextEra said:
Correct, this isn't just an Obama thing although one could argue the scope of Obama's XO have been far reaching. They continue worse with each administration.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's called partisan cover!
 
Montecresto said:
A wink wink, nod nod. No administration has ever been SERIOUS about border security!
Click to expand...

we know that now

we didnt know that then.....

which is why Reagan accepted the 1986 act.....he "expected" congress to actually do what they put into the law

so why would we continue to keep the borders relatively open and give amnesty again?

as i said before

fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me

we know better this time around.....or god help us all
 
gdgyva said:
we know that now

we didnt know that then.....

which is why Reagan accepted the 1986 act.....he "expected" congress to actually do what they put into the law

so why would we continue to keep the borders relatively open and give amnesty again?

as i said before

fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me

we know better this time around.....or god help us all
Click to expand...

apparently no one does know better this time around. There have been republican controlled houses and senates subsequent to Reagan, and the borders remained open. Open borders are good for big business, don't you understand this. The borders aren't going to be closed. Stop pointing fingers at the smart ass and acknowledge that the dumb elephant has done nothing to secure our borders either. There is a systemic problem that no amount of partisan politics is going to fix.
 
Montecresto said:
apparently no one does know better this time around. There have been republican controlled houses and senates subsequent to Reagan, and the borders remained open. Open borders are good for big business, don't you understand this. The borders aren't going to be closed. Stop pointing fingers at the smart ass and acknowledge that the dumb elephant has done nothing to secure our borders either. There is a systemic problem that no amount of partisan politics is going to fix.
Click to expand...

did i say either party was more at fault?

even if i agree that neither side wants to close the border, there is no way in hell we are granting amnesty again

look at the mess with the kids on the border now....this is becoming a MAJOR nightmare for the president

this morning i heard we are now doing commercials for both sides of the border asking people NOT to come....yeah right.....that will really work

those 12-14 million that are here.....they will continue to be undocumented.....

boehner knows it is political suicide to try and get this through the house

he isnt that stupid....close but not quite
 
gdgyva said:
did i say either party was more at fault?

even if i agree that neither side wants to close the border, there is no way in hell we are granting amnesty again

look at the mess with the kids on the border now....this is becoming a MAJOR nightmare for the president

this morning i heard we are now doing commercials for both sides of the border asking people NOT to come....yeah right.....that will really work

those 12-14 million that are here.....they will continue to be undocumented.....

boehner knows it is political suicide to try and get this through the house

he isnt that stupid....close but not quite
Click to expand...

Well many here are engaged in finger pointing, if that's not you, great your interested in fixing the problem. I agree, no amnesty again. But this is a matter of whether or not Americans want closed or open borders, and which group is going to push the hardest for that. Politicians no matter their party, are going to take the path of least resistance. BIG BUSINESS, isn't interested in closed borders, and so far they have ruled the day. We have a bi-partisan systemic problem, what's going to win out, big business, or sound immigration policy?
 
sawdust said:
I think that you are assigning too much power to the public. Look at the Clinton impeachment. The American public who paid attention to it saw it largely as amusement. There was no outrage. It was a show trial. Nobody really cared about it other than Lindsay Graham and a few other congresscritters. It was a lesson learned in congress that unless there is serious public outrage it's not worth the effort. Because impeachment is a political process and not a criminal proceeding and Americans are largely disengaged politically it's going to take something really extraordinary to make it happen again.

In addition, nobody in congress really wants to see our first black president recorded in history as being impeached.
Click to expand...
There were also those of us who were appalled at Clinton's lack of integrity.
 
Montecresto said:
Well first, there was no outrage over the Clinton impeachment because of the reason they were trying to impeach him, hardly injurious to national interest, our constitution, etc. as to Obama, his skin color should be irrelevant if he has violated our nations laws and his oath of office.
Click to expand...
WTF?

There was lots of concern. This was a point in our history when the country was cracking down on sexual harassment and fraternization with subordinates in the military. He was the Commander in Chief. Now the lawsuit was valid. Nobody is above the law, and he perjured himself. If he had just come clean, and said, yes, I'm a horndog... all would have been forgiven.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom