• 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 acts on immigration, announcing decision to defer deportations of 4 million

ttwtt78640 said:
Are you kidding me? The immigration law specifically requires application from OUTSIDE the US except for very narrowly defined refugee and asylum seekers. Obama does not like that law so he is changing the very meaning of the law to "laser focus" on areas that have no basis in the immigration law as written. Prosecutorial discretion is far different than changing immigration law; not arresting an unlicensed driver is far different than giving them a license.
Click to expand...

The immigration laws also specifically grant the President, the AG, and the Sec'y of HHS broad powers to exempt immigrants from deportation and allow them to work in the US. It requires no change to the text or the meaning of any laws in order for them to do so.

Gaius has even linked to the very laws which grant the executive branch those powers.
 
An illegal is stopped by the cops and the cops ask how long that person has been in the US the illegal replies more than five years. The cop cannot prove otherwise and the illegal is not required to prove so the illegal goes about their business. American tragedy.
 
You should have continued reading, rather than stopping after you saw what you wanted to see.



Derp said:
:doh

USCIS obtains over 80% of its funding from fee revenue. After consistently declining from
FY2003 to FY2008, the portion of USCIS’s budget from appropriations increased consistently for
fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011. In its FY2011 budget, the agency has requested additional
funds to defray the cost of military naturalizations and refugee and asylee applications, thereby
shifting this cost from immigration service applicants to U.S. taxpayers. Although the agency has
been appropriated several hundred million dollars in the past decade, these appropriations have
largely been directed toward specific projects, such as the backlog reduction initiative.
Consequently, USCIS fee revenue must cover overhead and adjudication costs for the agency to
operate efficiently.


www.ilw.com/immigrationdaily/news/2011,0421-crs.pdf
Click to expand...
 
apdst said:
No, the difference is, Reagan acted legally, when he signed a bill, passed by Congress.
Click to expand...

You are not very well informed...

Other recent precedents have been part of the contemporary debate. In 1985, during the administration of Republican President Ronald Reagan, Congress passed a reform bill that shielded some 3 million immigrants from deportation. The bill, however, did not include family members and Reagan responded to this flaw by halting the deportation of their children without waiting for Congress to act. In fact, Congress failed to act during his tenure and Reagan's Republican successor, George H. W. Bush, acted unilaterally to protect families from breakup through deportation. Democratic President Bill Clinton and Republican President George W. Bush also used presidential powers to make policy on immigration.

linkypoo...​

Reagan and Bush Sr. both used executive order to circumvent congress' do nothing on the topic. What say you about the constitutionality of that?
 
poweRob said:
You are not very well informed...

Other recent precedents have been part of the contemporary debate. In 1985, during the administration of Republican President Ronald Reagan, Congress passed a reform bill that shielded some 3 million immigrants from deportation. The bill, however, did not include family members and Reagan responded to this flaw by halting the deportation of their children without waiting for Congress to act. In fact, Congress failed to act during his tenure and Reagan's Republican successor, George H. W. Bush, acted unilaterally to protect families from breakup through deportation. Democratic President Bill Clinton and Republican President George W. Bush also used presidential powers to make policy on immigration.

linkypoo...​

Reagan and Bush Sr. both used executive order to circumvent congress' do nothing on the topic. What say you about the constitutionality of that?
Click to expand...

'Fraid not, neighbor.

Reagan and Bush Offer No Precedent for Obama's Amnesty Order - Atlantic Mobile
 
Hatuey said:
I haven't moved on to anything else. I showed why SCOTUS would back Obama on this and how precedent plays a role on the fact that it's very unlikely the GOP will get more than whining and a bill out of it. :lol:



What part of this is problematic for you: Federal officials, as an initial matter, must decide whether it makes sense to pursue removal at all.
Click to expand...

Only where the actual federal law says they have this leeway to decide. Take that away and the decision is out of the executive's hands.
 
poweRob said:
Pardon everyone if they scoff at a story made up by GW Bush's speechwriter. I'll stick with facts instead. Like that fact they that they did in fact use executive orders to expand upon the amnesty law.
Click to expand...

Reagan and Bush acted within the spirit abd framework of an existing bill.

GW's speech writer has more credibikity than anyone in the Obama Regime. The same regime that relied on stupid people to support Obamacare are relying in stupid people to support executive amnesty.
 
apdst said:
Reagan and Bush acted within the spirit abd framework of an existing bill.

GW's speech writer has more credibikity than anyone in the Obama Regime. The same regime that relied on stupid people to support Obamacare are relying in stupid people to support executive amnesty.
Click to expand...

.... as opposed to those that relied on stupid people to support a war in Iraq, by repeatedly using Iraq and Al Qaeda in the same sentence so many times that a large part of the population were led (and I emphasize the use of the word "led") to believe that Iraq was responsible for 9/11....

https://sgadaria.expressions.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Iraq-article_Gershkoff_Kushner.pdf

face it, the American voter is uneducated.



Speaking of uneducated voters, Obama's actions this week did not grant amnesty to anyone.....
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
.... as opposed to those that relied on stupid people to support a war in Iraq, by repeatedly using Iraq and Al Qaeda in the same sentence so many times that a large part of the population were led (and I emphasize the use of the word "led") to believe that Iraq was responsible for 9/11....

https://sgadaria.expressions.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Iraq-article_Gershkoff_Kushner.pdf

face it, the American voter is uneducated.



Speaking of uneducated voters, Obama's actions this week did not grant amnesty to anyone.....
Click to expand...

If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. :lamo
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
.... as opposed to those that relied on stupid people to support a war in Iraq, by repeatedly using Iraq and Al Qaeda in the same sentence so many times that a large part of the population were led (and I emphasize the use of the word "led") to believe that Iraq was responsible for 9/11....

https://sgadaria.expressions.syr.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Iraq-article_Gershkoff_Kushner.pdf

face it, the American voter is uneducated.



Speaking of uneducated voters, Obama's actions this week did not grant amnesty to anyone.....
Click to expand...

Yes, like the Democrat Controlled Senate and the 76-23 vote supporting the action in Iraq plus all the Democrat Congressional Representatives on record long before Bush took office in support of the Iraq Liberation Act. It doesn't seem that those facts matter to people like you who don't want to believe anything that flies in the face of your opinions or those of the wacko left.
 
poweRob said:
Pardon everyone if they scoff at a story made up by GW Bush's speechwriter. I'll stick with facts instead. Like that fact they that they did in fact use executive orders to expand upon the amnesty law.
Click to expand...
If you did any investigating you'd see that the facts are not on your side. Think of the run-up to Obamacare, but this time be a little more cynical.
 
apdst said:
Reagan and Bush acted within the spirit abd framework of an existing bill.
Click to expand...

They acted out of executive order... just as Obama has. It's no different no matter the spin you want to put on it.
 
Grant said:
If you did any investigating you'd see that the facts are not on your side. Think of the run-up to Obamacare, but this time be a little more cynical.
Click to expand...

How about you think about sticking to the topic instead of going on ludicrous off-topic rants? An Executive Order is an Executive Order. Get over it.
 
poweRob said:
They acted out of executive order... just as Obama has. It's no different no matter the spin you want to put on it.
Click to expand...

It is different and I'm not the one spinnin'. Go learn something outside your Daily KOS/Media Matters talking points and get back with us.
 
apdst said:
It is different and I'm not the one spinnin'. Go learn something outside your Daily KOS/Media Matters talking points and get back with us.
Click to expand...

It's only different because you want it to be different. BTW... I haven't read anything at all on Daily Kos/Media Matters on this topic. But I can't help but think you can't stop being spoon-fed by a Murdoch organization of some sort.
 
poweRob said:
It's only different because you want it to be different. BTW... I haven't read anything at all on Daily Kos/Media Matters on this topic. But I can't help but think you can't stop being spoon-fed by a Murdoch organization of some sort.
Click to expand...

You got your talking poinrs from somewhere. Let me guess, everything is cool because The Messiah said so? Yes?
 
apdst said:
You got your talking poinrs from somewhere. Let me guess, everything is cool because The Messiah said so? Yes?
Click to expand...

Ah yes... playing the "messiah" card. A blatant admission of fail.
 
Texmex said:
It's basically all they've done for years now!
Click to expand...

I am NOT on Obama's side on soooo much so when these hacks come out and say "your messiah" it's just them admitting they lost the argument and will just resort to trolling.
 
Thanks to all for your replies! Glad to see that, there are many people with the same opinion as me!
also, i've found a news yesterday and was really amazed. Has anybody seen that yet?
Dems warn backers: Obama could go to prison!
Futile attempt of repubs, to do anything. Why they can't use their powers now? They are shouting about Obama's lawlessness, but their actions look like LAWLESSNESS much more!
 
Our government has a nice habit of lying to its citizens. Even about its citizens. So nothing surprising in the fact that Obama says "the majority supports the immigration policy".
And 5 million people will not only decrease the number of jobs, ha! They will increase the number of dependents, the budget burden and tax burden.
So get ready to pay for them!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom