Obama to order immunity for young illegal immigrants

[Ninjahedge]

We do not "owe" them anything bfdd.

But it is unfair to treat them as criminals for something they did not consciously do, and then punish them by throwing them out of the lives they built in this country.

It is not like these guys are costing us boku $$ either. They are NOT citizens, so do not (to my knowledge) get welfare or medicare, and have false ID's for work which is taxed (sort of. They get paid next to nothing, some is reported, and a little tax is paid).

I think the more important thing is to look for traffickers and smugglers rather than people who have been living here for 20 years and (may be) productive members of society.

 

[Infohawk]

It is not like these guys are costing us boku $$ either. They are NOT citizens, so do not (to my knowledge) get welfare or medicare, and have false ID's for work which is taxed (sort of. They get paid next to nothing, some is reported, and a little tax is paid).

As soon as they have children here, the kids are legal and they cost lots of money. More than $7,000 a year to educate alone. (Again, I'm happy to provide a link if you say it will change your mind about anything). There is no way their sales taxes pay for that. That's not even getting into infrastructure and health spending. I remember a while back there was some strike regarding immigration issues. The lack of traffic was amazing.

 

[bfdd]

We do not "owe" them anything bfdd.

But it is unfair to treat them as criminals for something they did not consciously do, and then punish them by throwing them out of the lives they built in this country.

It is not like these guys are costing us boku $$ either. They are NOT citizens, so do not (to my knowledge) get welfare or medicare, and have false ID's for work which is taxed (sort of. They get paid next to nothing, some is reported, and a little tax is paid).

I think the more important thing is to look for traffickers and smugglers rather than people who have been living here for 20 years and (may be) productive members of society.

ignorance of the law doesn't allow one to flout the law. I'm also pretty sure we've tried children as adults for many other crimes as well, why is this any different?

Don't get me wrong I support the path of citizenship for most of those eligible for the Dream Act, I grew up through school with many people who would be eligible for the Dream Act. But don't tell me they didn't take welfare. Public schooling is a form of social welfare and they absolutely took advantage of it.

They shouldn't be in the front of the line though. They should be 2nd in line behind those who followed the rules and arrived legally.

 

[Svnla]

...But it is unfair to treat them as criminals for something they did not consciously do, and then punish them by throwing them out of the lives they built in this country...

Is is fair for them to be way ahead of the line for those that are waiting for years and spend a small fortune to get in LEGALLY? Why even bother to have immigration law? Heck, LEGALS may as well just sneak in ILLEGALLY and then claim sob stories to stay and skip all the headache and expense.

I just don't understand why the US is giving the fingers for those LEGAL immigrants that have the skill, the money, the brain, the motivation, the everything to succeed and giving breaks to those uneducated, unable to speak English, and have zero skill ILLEGALS. The future depends on the brain power, not brute force power. That's just beyond insane and stupid.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Yet 2/3 of the US public approve of it. OK! And how many of posters here that are against it, hispanic?

I'm 2nd generation Filipino and the wife is a 2nd generation Mexican and we're both against this bullcrap as we have multiple family members still WAITING to get in the LEGAL way!

 

[fskimospy]

King Obama last year said he couldn't change immigration law without congress.

King Obama this year changed the law.

Without changing the law, illegal immigrants could not get work permits.

Because King Obama changed the law, they now can.

Its very simple, please try to keep up.

Obama never claimed he couldn't do this.

Nothing about this changes the law.

Please educate yourself.

 

[michal1980]

Obama never claimed he couldn't do this.

Nothing about this changes the law.

Please educate yourself.

please stop being a brown noser water boy..

the law is changeed. obama did say he couldnt do this

Before King Obamas statement if found the illegals would get deported according to our laws. After King Obamas statement, not only will they not be deported they will be allowed to work.

you educate yourself.

 

[fskimospy]

Oh by all means please link Obama saying he couldn't do this. Hint:be careful when doing so, it's a trap.

What he did is entirely consistent with both the law and previous actions by other administrations. Its not my fault you dont know enough to know this.

Too much fox news.

 

[michal1980]

Oh by all means please link Obama saying he couldn't do this. Hint:be careful when doing so, it's a trap.

What he did is entirely consistent with both the law and previous actions by other administrations. Its not my fault you dont know enough to know this.

Too much fox news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wD5Y88UWno

What trap?

Theres no trap. Because I dont accept your twisted definition of him not changing the law.

Kind Obama came out last week and changed the law.

Before his speech the law said people should be deborted. After his speech they wont be.

If you dont see that as a change, then your blind.

 

[alzan]

So if congress does not pass a law the President can just make it so anyway?

Many presidents have used and will use Executive Orders in the past and will in the future. Were you upset the previous times they were used/will you be upset when they're used in the future.

Or are you just upset because it's Obama doing it?

P.S. Executive Orders are of limited duration, just in case you missed that in Civics class. That makes them different from a law which is permanent until/unless overturned.

 

[alzan]

So far:

Obama stopped defending the DOMA. To gain votes.

Obama stopped enforcing immigrations laws. To gain votes.

Obama stopped Florida from checking its voter roles: To gain votes.


What proof do you have he will enforce voting laws?

So far his history has soon he likes to ignore laws whenever it can buy him a vote.

So far:

Actual proof of gained votes by not enforcing DOMA. None

Actual proof of gained votes by not enforcing immigration laws. None

Actual proof of Obama stopping Florida from checking it's voter rolls. None


What proof do you have that he will not enforce voting laws.

So far your history has shown that you will grasp at whatever straws you can that you think cast Obama in a bad light.

 

[michal1980]

So far:

Actual proof of gained votes by not enforcing DOMA. None

Actual proof of gained votes by not enforcing immigration laws. None

Actual proof of Obama stopping Florida from checking it's voter rolls. None


What proof do you have that he will not enforce voting laws.

So far your history has shown that you will grasp at whatever straws you can that you think cast Obama in a bad light.

I'm just telling you the reasons why he did what he did.

I love you libs that just keep raising the bar when you dont like the answers.

 

[michal1980]

Many presidents have used and will use Executive Orders in the past and will in the future. Were you upset the previous times they were used/will you be upset when they're used in the future.

Or are you just upset because it's Obama doing it?

P.S. Executive Orders are of limited duration, just in case you missed that in Civics class. That makes them different from a law which is permanent until/unless overturned.

Saying that duration is limited, is at best misleading.

The duration can be forever if no one revokes the order.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Saying that duration is limited, is at best misleading.

The duration can be forever if no one revokes the order.

This is forever, until someone does the 'amnesty bill' No politician will revoke this in fear of the hispanic vote. It's done and the way Romney is talking he has no intention of revoking this either. I'm willing to allow one more fricken amnesty BS for the 12 mil here, BUT with a couple new constitutional amendments: forever banning future anchor babies by rewriting the shitty 14th amendment sec 1, English as the official language, severe harsh penalties with jail time for employers who hire illegals, NO public education for any future illegal children, AND banning any future attempts at amnesty. This should've been done with the last amnesty done in the 80's.

 

[fskimospy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wD5Y88UWno

What trap?

Theres no trap. Because I dont accept your twisted definition of him not changing the law.

Kind Obama came out last week and changed the law.

Before his speech the law said people should be deborted. After his speech they wont be.

If you dont see that as a change, then your blind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neOyMwDitu0

This is Obama's actual position on the issue (skip to about 26:00). I told you not to do it, but that just shows how bad the sources you get your news from are. What's sad is that I bet this has no impact on what you do in the future.

It's not a twisted definition, it's simply reality. You don't understand how the law works in regards to this issue and so you're mad because the president did something totally within the law that you don't like. I understand your frustration, but we don't evaluate the law based on whether or not you're mad.

I also can't help but notice that you keep continuously avoiding the fact that presidents have been using the exact same power for 40 years, Republicans and Democrats alike. You keep refusing to answer if they were all kings as well as why you stayed so silent on the issue while they were apparently installing the monarchy. Not that it's actually any secret why you hold such a double standard because this was never about the law, this is about you cheering for your political football team.

 

[boomerang]

The old illegal immigrants are being discriminated against because of their age. Immunity for all! I can't believe the media isn't calling Obama out on this one. What a hate-filled discriminatory person he is. Shameful!

 

[michal1980]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neOyMwDitu0

This is Obama's actual position on the issue (skip to about 26:00). I told you not to do it, but that just shows how bad the sources you get your news from are. What's sad is that I bet this has no impact on what you do in the future.

It's not a twisted definition, it's simply reality. You don't understand how the law works in regards to this issue and so you're mad because the president did something totally within the law that you don't like. I understand your frustration, but we don't evaluate the law based on whether or not you're mad.

I also can't help but notice that you keep continuously avoiding the fact that presidents have been using the exact same power for 40 years, Republicans and Democrats alike. You keep refusing to answer if they were all kings as well as why you stayed so silent on the issue while they were apparently installing the monarchy. Not that it's actually any secret why you hold such a double standard because this was never about the law, this is about you cheering for your political football team.

LOL. Your video proves my point.

Obama said he couldn't do what he did in your video, and then went ahead and did it.

Your just to much of a brownnoser to realize that.

An executive order is nearly a law. with the difference that the next president can come in and over turn it.

Saying you will prioritize who gets deported, is far different then making up a law (executive order) that says you will not be deported.

 

[Ninjahedge]

ignorance of the law doesn't allow one to flout the law. I'm also pretty sure we've tried children as adults for many other crimes as well, why is this any different?

So if I were to grab your hand, as a 3yo, put a knife in it, and have you stab an old lady, it would be our fault and not mine?

Don't get me wrong I support the path of citizenship for most of those eligible for the Dream Act, I grew up through school with many people who would be eligible for the Dream Act. But don't tell me they didn't take welfare. Public schooling is a form of social welfare and they absolutely took advantage of it.

PS is not welfare. As much as you may qualify it as such, when people start shifting things like that around, the definitions get muddled.

Not only that, I WISH Welfare was more like the PSS. I WISH that money given was used to improve someone's life and train them for more, and not just keep them from falling further and (eventually) costing us even more through their own suffering.

They shouldn't be in the front of the line though. They should be 2nd in line behind those who followed the rules and arrived legally.

There should be special consideration given to them. Move them up the line in the list and call some of the requirements as filled.

Take a look at these guys and see what the primary PROBLEM is with having them stay (Education? Crime?) and try to fix that by providing services, and pruning the bad from the good.

If the immigrant was convicted of something more serious than jaywalking, buh-bye! But if they are a hard working "sanitation engineer", then we really should not kick him out for something his parents did to make his life better.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Is is fair for them to be way ahead of the line for those that are waiting for years and spend a small fortune to get in LEGALLY? Why even bother to have immigration law? Heck, LEGALS may as well just sneak in ILLEGALLY and then claim sob stories to stay and skip all the headache and expense.

Tell me where I said that.

Can you please go back and read my examples?

If a 3yo comes in illegally and is found out when they are 4, they are going back with mommy and daddy.

But a 3yo that is now 20 and a productive member of society should not be kicked to the curb because of something his parents did.

And no, this is not a shortcut/get out of jail (Mexico) free card. They still have to be "worthy" individuals that are valued members of the community.

I just don't understand why the US is giving the fingers for those LEGAL immigrants that have the skill, the money, the brain, the motivation, the everything to succeed and giving breaks to those uneducated, unable to speak English, and have zero skill ILLEGALS. The future depends on the brain power, not brute force power. That's just beyond insane and stupid.

1. The term would be "Giving the finger to all those legal....."

2. I do NOT think that our immigration policy is fair, but siting one wrong does not justify another.


Oh, BTW, the Asians are outnumbering the Mexicans now (FYI), both legally and not.

(DNR, but just a quick google link)
http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-n...cs-as-largest-wave-of-new-immigrants-to-us-2/

 

[Ninjahedge]

I'm just telling you the reasons why he did what he did.

Speculation.

I love you libs that just keep raising the bar when you dont like the answers.

Unsubstantiated slander.

 

[alzan]

I'm just telling you the reasons why he did what he did.

I love you libs that just keep raising the bar when you dont like the answers.

If those are the reasons then provide proof. It shouldn't be that hard to provide proof if those are the reasons.

No bar has been raised, the answers you gave are opinions.

 

[Ninjahedge]

The old illegal immigrants are being discriminated against because of their age. Immunity for all! I can't believe the media isn't calling Obama out on this one. What a hate-filled discriminatory person he is. Shameful!

I know you are being sarcastic, but you also know this is silly.


the thing that gets me is that this can be traced back to our own laws when it comes to minors. Unless the kid is "tried as an adult", most crimes are forgiven or erased from record when a kid turns 18 (or a limited term of duration after that).

So the same laws that make it so a kid under 18 does not receive the same treatment or punishment as one over 18 is what can be attributed to this. The "crime" of "illegal immigration" should be handled differently depending on the age and other factors.

Maybe not exactly the same way as with our rule on crimes and minors, but with a similar reasoning.

 

[fskimospy]

LOL. Your video proves my point.

Obama said he couldn't do what he did in your video, and then went ahead and did it.

Your just to much of a brownnoser to realize that.

An executive order is nearly a law. with the difference that the next president can come in and over turn it.

Saying you will prioritize who gets deported, is far different then making up a law (executive order) that says you will not be deported.

Is this some sort of bizarro world we're living in? My video explicitly refutes your point. What Obama did was issue an order to prioritize enforcement of immigration laws, which is exactly what he said he could do in the video. Electing to defer action on deportations and to not pursue certain groups due to the limited resources available is almost word for word what he said. You were flat out wrong, and I just proved it. It's okay to admit you're wrong sometimes.

EDIT: Here's the quote by Obama

What we can do is to prioritize enforcement — since there are limited enforcement resources — and say, we’re not going to go chasing after this young man or anybody else who has been acting responsibly, and would otherwise qualify for legal status if the DREAM Act passed.

Also, while it's nice to notice you start to retreat about the whole 'changing the law' thing, you're still very very wrong. Executive orders are not laws in any way, shape, or form. Words have meanings.

Still waiting for an explanation on why Obama doing this is making him a king or whatever, but the previous presidents who undertook deferred action somehow weren't. Why is it so hard to answer such a simple question?

 

[nehalem256]

I also can't help but notice that you keep continuously avoiding the fact that presidents have been using the exact same power for 40 years, Republicans and Democrats alike. You keep refusing to answer if they were all kings as well as why you stayed so silent on the issue while they were apparently installing the monarchy. Not that it's actually any secret why you hold such a double standard because this was never about the law, this is about you cheering for your political football team.

Perhaps you should post a link describing exactly what a past President did that you think is comparable to Obama's recent action so we can fairly compare it.

 

[fskimospy]

Perhaps you should post a link describing exactly what a past President did that you think is comparable to Obama's recent action so we can fairly compare it.

Deferred action by bush halting the deportation proceedings for thousands of Liberians. What is odd to me is that you guys would have to ask for for examples.