Obama to sign executive order on Immigration Reform

[Atreus21]

Executive order power should be stripped from the President.

No it shouldn't. If congress believes this is an abuse of power legally exercised, they should threaten to impeach him.

 

[fskimospy]

Is this an alternate reality you're living in or is some form of delusion? Alzheimer's maybe? Maybe you're just one of those 'bitter clingers' we heard about. Holding onto your political party and the progressive dream.

Thank You, Mr. President

Once or maybe twice in their lifetime people will see such a complete routing of a political party. When the overreach is so great, so off base that the political underpinnings of the nation are flipped in an unceremonious manner. The Democrat Party through their own ministrations have put themselves in a position of impotence with nothing on the horizon but further decline. I'm certain that the phoenix will rise from the ashes but some have predicted it could take as long as 100 years.

So rattle that sabre Obama, you paper tiger, you. Be careful to not get too close to the flame.

His Party Is at a Low Point, and Obama Seems Passive

It's always interesting to read your posts as they provide a lot of insight into what rabid, ultra-partisans who are totally in the right wing information bubble think.

no rational person would believe this nonsense.

 

[theeedude]

Is this an alternate reality you're living in or is some form of delusion? Alzheimer's maybe? Maybe you're just one of those 'bitter clingers' we heard about. Holding onto your political party and the progressive dream.

Thank You, Mr. President

Once or maybe twice in their lifetime people will see such a complete routing of a political party. When the overreach is so great, so off base that the political underpinnings of the nation are flipped in an unceremonious manner. The Democrat Party through their own ministrations have put themselves in a position of impotence with nothing on the horizon but further decline. I'm certain that the phoenix will rise from the ashes but some have predicted it could take as long as 100 years.

So rattle that sabre Obama, you paper tiger, you. Be careful to not get too close to the flame.

His Party Is at a Low Point, and Obama Seems Passive

Yeah, and? GOP won big in 2010 too, Obama got reelected in 2012.
Electoral college map is not good for the GOP when people actually bother to vote in presidential years, they have to again sweep all the big battleground states and some small ones, whereas Democrats have to win one or two.
http://www.270towin.com/2016_election_predictions.php?mapid=bIIN

Plus GOP now has to govern. And they don't have the faintest idea how to.

 

[Svnla]

CNN - more Americans against than for (48% vs. 38%) about this issue = https://www.facebook.com/cnn/photos/a.369810096508.159795.5550296508/10153074477106509/?type=1

 

[cabri]

Yeah, and? GOP won big in 2010 too, Obama got reelected in 2012.
Electoral college map is not good for the GOP when people actually bother to vote in presidential years, they have to again sweep all the big battleground states and some small ones, whereas Democrats have to win one or two.
http://www.270towin.com/2016_election_predictions.php?mapid=bIIN

Plus GOP now has to govern. And they don't have the faintest idea how to.

the map has changed for Obama in '12 because his actions were not known and his flaws were being kept hidden.

'14 was a referendum on Obama and the Democrat policies.

The blue states do not have to vote Democrat in '16; there is no rule that says so.

One reason Obama got in because voters were upset with the Republicans and Bush.

Only once since FDR/Truman has a party retained the WH for more than 8 years.

Most of your blue states voted against Mondale and Dukakis; so there is no guarantees.

Remember that Clinton started to be unpopular at the end and Gore considered him to be an millstone.

In this past election many candidates wanted to distance themselves from Obama.

 

[werepossum]

Forget illegal immigration, awareness needs raising over a worsening and far broader issue in regards to the illegal and unconstitutional Presidential Executive Orders throughout history.

Only Congress has the authority to enact/create laws. The President only has the authority to reaffirm or punctuate existing laws. Enough already of this increasingly fascist dictatorship and outright treason.

Well said. No more Executive Orders, no more signing statements.

Hyperbole much?

The President has repeatedly said that his EOs will be unravelled the minute a bill gets passed in relation to immigration. This isn't a permanent decree.

Guess who makes bills? That's right, congress. And what has the house been doing? Pontificating and blathering and foaming and doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

The house should do what George Carlin once said "Blow it out your ass! Blow it out your ass!" for what they've been talking for the past year and a half re: immigration is about as worthless and as offensive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3VNBBUp2Cw

Bullshit. Obama promising to revoke his Executive Order is valid only if he gets everything he wants, leaving him in his self-appointed position as Emperor. (I say that because he's now doing what he said he could not do because he was not Emperor, and after these midterms it's damned sure the American people didn't raise him.)

I think I figured out why republicans won so big in the last election.
It wasn't that more people are working and should give Obama credit, or stocks are soaring, or gas prices are dropping, or that more people can get healthcare.
Obama deserves credit for all that, and that should have guaranteed a democratic win.
But none of that good news mattered.
What mattered was that both republican and democrat voters had drawn a line, and reached their limit, when it comes to tolerating illegal immigration any further.

In 1992 it was the economy, stupid.
In 2014 it was illegal immigration, stupid.
No one seen that coming. Not the press, not the poll takers.
But one group that seen it all too clearly? The voter.

Everyone seems to believe illegals are pouring over into this country by thousands a day.
But not only that, believe they are also taking our good jobs, taking our social benefits, getting drivers license, free food stamps, and free healthcare as well as free Obamacare.
That is the general belief.

And since republicans in congress refused to do anything on illegal immigration at all, many, most, felt that doing nothing was the right thing to do.
To do absolutely nothing at all.

I'm totally convinced no matter how the peoples personal lives may have improved, economy improved, none of that mattered this last election.
What mattered were republicans and their blocking anything illegal immigration reform.
People either stayed home (democrats), or turned out to vote pro republican.
Because if you are an American citizen, you supported the party that totally refused to address anything illegal immigrant.
And that meant blocking any effort to pass new legislation with a hint of pro immigration.

Bottom line, people simply did not trust congress with addressing illegal immigration.
So, to do nothing was exactly what the public wanted.
That way, the public could be assured nothing bad nor good would be done.
Nothing at all. Not one single thing.
And that was the republican game plan, and thus their win.

Everyone I talk to, including people with close Hispanic ties, felt illegal immigrants are taking over, taxing our resources, handed free government benefits, and take all the good from America.
That is exactly what they believe.
And what gave republicans their opportunity.

And it could as well give republicans a presidential win come 2016.
Even with a Hillary in the mix.
Especially if that republican candidate might be a down to earth Chris Christie or Jeb Bush.
Someone, anyone, not fruitcake loony or far religious right wing.
I'd wager Mitt Romney or John McCain could easily win if this anti-illegal immigrant trend keeps up.
Again, even with adding Hillary to the mix.
And Obama is about to give the republicans all the fuel they need cross the finish line come 2016.
Obama is doing the right thing. But it will cost democrats much in the end.
Probably the presidency come 2016.

Could be, but the Pubby leadership is also pro-illegal, so it's a double edged sword for them.

 

[ivwshane]

I guess you forget the bills passed that were supposed to build a complete fence, and enforce security at the border... Which then get defunded. On top of that we have a president signalling his intents on illegal immigration and flooding our border with millions more while the opportunity is good.

Where do you people come up with this shit?

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...e-imus-more-illegal-immigrants-pouring-now-u/

 

[ivwshane]

Well said. No more Executive Orders, no more signing statements.


Bullshit. Obama promising to revoke his Executive Order is valid only if he gets everything he wants, leaving him in his self-appointed position as Emperor. (I say that because he's now doing what he said he could not do because he was not Emperor, and after these midterms it's damned sure the American people didn't raise him.)


Could be, but the Pubby leadership is also pro-illegal, so it's a double edged sword for them.

The senate bill isn't everything he wanted nor is it a give a way and he has said he will sign it, so I have no idea where you are pulling this crap from.

 

[theeedude]

the map has changed for Obama in '12 because his actions were not known and his flaws were being kept hidden.

'14 was a referendum on Obama and the Democrat policies.

The blue states do not have to vote Democrat in '16; there is no rule that says so.

One reason Obama got in because voters were upset with the Republicans and Bush.

Only once since FDR/Truman has a party retained the WH for more than 8 years.

Most of your blue states voted against Mondale and Dukakis; so there is no guarantees.

Remember that Clinton started to be unpopular at the end and Gore considered him to be an millstone.

In this past election many candidates wanted to distance themselves from Obama.

2010 was a referendum on Obama too, we were told. He won in 2012.
Gore was a political idiot. If he ran on Clinton economy instead of "being his own man" he'd be president.
If GOP's big hope is that blue states will vote Republican, go for it, spend ad money in California for all I care.
Clinton did not start to be unpopular at the end, check your facts, he left at 65% approval.

 

[Pneumothorax]

No it shouldn't. If congress believes this is an abuse of power legally exercised, they should threaten to impeach him.

The bar for impeachment is too high, should be a 'straight up or down vote' at 50%+ like Obama likes to espouse about his nominees.

 

[BoomerD]

O'Bummer won in 2012 because the American people were given the choice between a shit sandwich and a shit sandwich with onions.

It was a classic case of "vote for the candidate you hate less than the other one."

In 2008, for the first time in my life, (I started voting in 1972) I did NOT vote for the Democratic candidate for President. I did not trust a Chicago politician, no matter how good of a speaker he was...in 2012, I came back to my roots and (despite the bad taste in my mouth) voted (D) to help keep Mitt the Mormon from getting the office.
I'd vote 3rd party again...IF they could ever come up with a viable candidate who doesn't come off as bat-shit crazy. I liked some of the things Ross Perot had to say 20+ years ago...but only some. Same with Ron Paul. SOME of the things he says sound great...but sadly, he too came off as bat-shit crazy in most of the things he espoused.
Unfortunately, I think it really doesn't matter TOO much who gets elected...the system corrupts everyone. Until we fix the system...we just get slightly different versions of the same shit sandwich.

 

[fskimospy]

Well said. No more Executive Orders, no more signing statements.


Bullshit. Obama promising to revoke his Executive Order is valid only if he gets everything he wants, leaving him in his self-appointed position as Emperor. (I say that because he's now doing what he said he could not do because he was not Emperor, and after these midterms it's damned sure the American people didn't raise him.)


Could be, but the Pubby leadership is also pro-illegal, so it's a double edged sword for them.

Interesting. You want the person who has the constitutional duty to issue orders to the executive branch of government to not be able to issue executive orders.

not only is that stupid, but it would also be insanely unconstitutional.

 

[fskimospy]

The bar for impeachment is too high, should be a 'straight up or down vote' at 50%+ like Obama likes to espouse about his nominees.

You can add that on to your effort to change the constitution and repeal the 14th amendment, I guess?

 

[ivwshane]

The bar for impeachment is too high, should be a 'straight up or down vote' at 50%+ like Obama likes to espouse about his nominees.

You mean like the senate has been doing since it's inception? Just because you are ignorant on the process doesn't mean what "Obama likes" is wrong just because you don't like Obama.



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2001/01/senate_confirmation_faq.html

How many senators have to vote to approve a nomination?

A simple majority--that is, one more in favor than opposed. If the Senate, divided along party lines, splits 50-50 on any nomination, the vice president-to-be, Dick Cheney, can cast the tie-breaker. The majority of nominations, however, don't come up for a roll call vote but are approved by unanimous consent--agreement that does not require a recording of individual votes. It has become custom, however, given the importance of the positions, for Cabinet members and Supreme Court justices to get a roll call vote. And if a nomination is controversial, opposing senators will request a roll call in order to register their objection.

 

[werepossum]

The senate bill isn't everything he wanted nor is it a give a way and he has said he will sign it, so I have no idea where you are pulling this crap from.

Of course it's everything he wants - he gets his legalization and like EVERY other immigration compromise bill the border security will never happen.

Interesting. You want the person who has the constitutional duty to issue orders to the executive branch of government to not be able to issue executive orders.

not only is that stupid, but it would also be insanely unconstitutional.

First off, there is NO Constitutional duty for the President to issue Executive Orders, which have the force of law unless overturned. The vast majority of direction to executive branch agencies is not by Executive Order. More importantly, as Bradly pointed out Executive Orders are increasingly used to nullify actual standing law. At this point, they are more damage and danger than benefit.

 

[ivwshane]

Of course it's everything he wants - he gets his legalization and like EVERY other immigration compromise bill the border security will never happen.


First off, there is NO Constitutional duty for the President to issue Executive Orders, which have the force of law unless overturned. The vast majority of direction to executive branch agencies is not by Executive Order. More importantly, as Bradly pointed out Executive Orders are increasingly used to nullify actual standing law. At this point, they are more damage and danger than benefit.

That's pretty easy to say when it's clear you haven't read up on the bill.

If you feel comfortable talking out your ass, that's on you but I've provided enough links on the subject to educate anyone. You can lead a donkey to water but you can't make the ass drink it

 

[VRAMdemon]

Lol!...The truth is that the GOP wants immigration reform as bad or more as the democrats do, their wingnut base simply won't let them do it without punishment. They are not going to stop the president even if they could, they just have to act tough for their base. You'd think the would be content to rest on their laurels, after defeating Obama's plan to flood America with illegal gay Ebola viruses...

 

[BoomerD]

Interesting. You want the person who has the constitutional duty to issue orders to the executive branch of government to not be able to issue executive orders.

not only is that stupid, but it would also be insanely unconstitutional.

No, you mis-understand. The folks on the right LIKE the power of presidential executive orders, especially when there is a (D) leaning congress...it's only when the situation is reversed that they have a problem with it...

I posted this earlier in this same thread:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richard...-of-presidential-power-obama-is-a-mere-piker/

(yes, I realize O'Bummer's numbers have increased this year, but the point is still valid)

 

[fskimospy]

Of course it's everything he wants - he gets his legalization and like EVERY other immigration compromise bill the border security will never happen.


First off, there is NO Constitutional duty for the President to issue Executive Orders, which have the force of law unless overturned. The vast majority of direction to executive branch agencies is not by Executive Order. More importantly, as Bradly pointed out Executive Orders are increasingly used to nullify actual standing law. At this point, they are more damage and danger than benefit.

He has no DUTY to issue orders to the executive branch but as all executive power is vested in the president all executive direction must come from him, either explicitly or by delegated authority. All of his decisions while carrying out the functions of his office carry the force of law unless they are contrary to lawful statute or exceed his powers granted by the constitution. Executive orders that you're talking about is simply a formalized process for it.

Since all executive orders that are lawful derive their authority from powers given to the president by the constitution or powers given to him by legislation, you're arguing that the president shouldn't be able to use his constitutional and statutory authority.

it should be clear how dumb that is.

 

[michal1980]

He has no DUTY to issue orders to the executive branch but as all executive power is vested in the president all executive direction must come from him, either explicitly or by delegated authority. All of his decisions while carrying out the functions of his office carry the force of law unless they are contrary to lawful statute or exceed his powers granted by the constitution. Executive orders that you're talking about is simply a formalized process for it.

Since all executive orders that are lawful derive their authority from powers given to the president by the constitution or powers given to him by legislation, you're arguing that the president shouldn't be able to use his constitutional and statutory authority.

it should be clear how dumb that is.

you know whats dumb and you wont address...


how for years the president was saying he couldn't stop all these deportations, and then all of a sudden he can.

 

[ivwshane]

you know whats dumb and you wont address...


how for years the president was saying he couldn't stop all these deportations, and then all of a sudden he can.

He hasn't stopped deportations he's redirected the resources on who gets deported.

I don't know how many times I have to explain it to you before it gets through your thick ass skull.

Did you even bother to read any of the links in this post:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36920190&postcount=287


You embody exactly what's wrong with the citizens of this country.

 

[michal1980]

He hasn't stopped deportations he's redirected the resources on who gets deported.

I don't know how many times I have to explain it to you before it gets through your thick ass skull.

Did you even bother to read any of the links in this post:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36920190&postcount=287


You embody exactly what's wrong with the citizens of this country.

spinning spinning spinning.

If Obama is not stopping deportations with his actions today, and DACA, then what exactly is he doing?


PS Obama's deportation numbers are a lie
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...amned-lies-and-obamas-deportation-statistics/

 

[Pneumothorax]

He hasn't stopped deportations he's redirected the resources on who gets deported.

I don't know how many times I have to explain it to you before it gets through your thick ass skull.

Did you even bother to read any of the links in this post:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36920190&postcount=287


You embody exactly what's wrong with the citizens of this country.

Aren't those numbers just inflated BS?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402-story.html#page=1

The LA Times is not a right leaning newspaper.

 

[ivwshane]

Aren't those numbers just inflated BS?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402-story.html#page=1

The LA Times is not a right leaning newspaper.

No and I posted a link in my previous post that explains the talking point.

 

[theeedude]

O'Bummer won in 2012 because the American people were given the choice between a shit sandwich and a shit sandwich with onions.

It was a classic case of "vote for the candidate you hate less than the other one."

In 2008, for the first time in my life, (I started voting in 1972) I did NOT vote for the Democratic candidate for President. I did not trust a Chicago politician, no matter how good of a speaker he was...in 2012, I came back to my roots and (despite the bad taste in my mouth) voted (D) to help keep Mitt the Mormon from getting the office.
I'd vote 3rd party again...IF they could ever come up with a viable candidate who doesn't come off as bat-shit crazy. I liked some of the things Ross Perot had to say 20+ years ago...but only some. Same with Ron Paul. SOME of the things he says sound great...but sadly, he too came off as bat-shit crazy in most of the things he espoused.
Unfortunately, I think it really doesn't matter TOO much who gets elected...the system corrupts everyone. Until we fix the system...we just get slightly different versions of the same shit sandwich.

Sounds to me like you are going to hold your nose and vote Democrat when all is said and done. :thumbsup: I think Romney is about as reasonable a Republican (short of Huntsman) that GOP could have picked in that primary, and he wasn't good enough for you.