Obama to sign executive order on Immigration Reform

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

bradley

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2000
3,671
2
81
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.
 

nixium

Senior member
Aug 25, 2008
919
3
81
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.

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
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,959
6,798
126
That's the whole point! I agree that enforcement can certainly be increased - this is the country that found and killed OBL for god's sake. However, there is no political will, and more importantly, there is no will from the people to do it on a national scale.

Like I said, if 90% of the public wanted it done, it would be done, regardless of special interests. The fact of the matter is the deportation-only crowd is not that big. You *will* not get what you want unless something radically changes. I'm willing to bet this is with every chamber and the supreme court controlled by republicans with veto proof majorities.

So what do you do then?

Remember by doing nothing, immigration flows are going to continue at the current rate, and the illegal population is only going to build up.

You would understand this if you knew that we always create what we fear. Self hate always reaches around to stab us in the back. They only dream that who they hate is the other, the illegal or a thousand other substitutes.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Actually the senate bill addresses both issues and it ties any "amnesty" deals to border security.

I'd link the relevant part but apparently people don't bother fucking reading any more.

As has apparently been done in the past. The problem is that while amnesty goes into effect almost immediately the "border security" part somehow never happens.

Fern
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,744
17,398
136
As has apparently been done in the past. The problem is that while amnesty goes into effect almost immediately the "border security" part somehow never happens.

Fern

Nope, not true, in fact it's directly tied to border security. Did you read any of the links I provided?
 

cabri

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2012
3,616
1
81
Actually the senate bill addresses both issues and it ties any "amnesty" deals to border security.

I'd link the relevant part but apparently people don't bother fucking reading any more.

As has apparently been done in the past. The problem is that while amnesty goes into effect almost immediately the "border security" part somehow never happens.

Fern

Nope, not true, in fact it's directly tied to border security. Did you read any of the links I provided?

While it may be tied; as has been shown, implementing is discretionary.
Just like Obama's plan is discretionary; he picks and chooses what he wants to be enforced.

Congress has the ability to control the purse strings to allow enforcement; such can reduce the ability of an agency to perform actions, but not force actions.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
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.

haha. Sure.

Obama can un-shutdown the government as soon as he agrees to defund Obamacare.
 
Last edited:

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,744
17,398
136
While it may be tied; as has been shown, implementing is discretionary.
Just like Obama's plan is discretionary; he picks and chooses what he wants to be enforced.

Congress has the ability to control the purse strings to allow enforcement; such can reduce the ability of an agency to perform actions, but not force actions.

Obama will be president for two more years, do you think this problem will be fixed by then?
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
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

The president doesn't enforce current immigration laws, what makes you think he'll enforce new immigration laws?

He's also a liar on the topic of executive powers.:

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws

Well, I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law

Well, look Jackie, this is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that you know I’m the president of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed, and Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.

Here’s the problem that I have, Jose, and I have said this consistently. My job in the executive branch is to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said, here’s the law when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they allocate a whole bunch of money for enforcement. What I have been able to do is make a legal argument that I think is absolutely right, which is that given the resources we have, we can’t do everything that Congress has asked us to do, what we can do is then carve out the DREAM Act folks….But if we start broadening that, then essentially, I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally. So that’s not an option

all Obama quotes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...sing-executive-action-on-illegal-immigration/

The man is a fucking liar.
 
Last edited:

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91

Yes I have evidence. he stopped deporting kids with DACA, tomorrow he's announcing he will ignore more immigration laws.

But you keep believing the liar in chief, who has time and time again said he cannot ignore the laws of the land, until tomorrow, when all of a sudden he can ignore the laws of the land.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,744
17,398
136
Yes I have evidence. he stopped deporting kids with DACA, tomorrow he's announcing he will ignore more immigration laws.

But you keep believing the liar in chief, who has time and time again said he cannot ignore the laws of the land, until tomorrow, when all of a sudden he can ignore the laws of the land.

No, as I've explained earlier, he prioritized resources for deportations, which is well within his authority and pretty smart policy wise and with limited resources (which aren't all monetary).
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
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.
 
Last edited:

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
No, as I've explained earlier, he prioritized resources for deportations, which is well within his authority and pretty smart policy wise and with limited resources (which aren't all monetary).

yes you said that. But that's spinning reality.

You keep saying that if we pass new laws he will enforce those. But whats to stop him from 'prioritized resources for deportations' after a new law is passed? Nothing.

Obama him self said multiple times as I've cited that it is beyond his authority to ignore the law to the extent he is going. Was he wrong all those times before? Or is he wrong now? If he isn't wrong now, then he was just lying over and over again.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Obama is doing the nation a huge favor. His actions in regards to the illegal immigrant issue will be the driving force behind a movement to return back to adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law. He will truly be an historic President for not what he had hoped but for his reckless abandonment of the core principles that the nation was founded upon.

George Will has said that Obama is the 'greatest builder of the Republican Party since Reagan'. Mr. Will could not be more correct.

So thanks Obama! Please wield that mighty pen of yours this evening and put into motion the dissolution of the Democrat Party as we know it today. History is being made.
 

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
Guess who makes bills? That's right, congress. And what has the house been doing? Pontificating and blathering and foaming and doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

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.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,916
33,571
136
hmmm, maybe things were different then:

"Their actions were less controversial because there was a consensus in Washington that the 1986 law needed a few fixes and Congress was poised to act on them"

So seems like Regan and Bush weren't going full steam ahead against congress, unlike Obama.

From your own article:



So in 2013 Obama couldn't and wouldn't expand his amnesty, because according to him it would be illegal, in 2014, he changed his mind.

Please liberals continue defending this POS that's waging a war against American workers.

They weren't going against Congress in 80s because congress worked with the President.

Despite differences Tip O'Neil and Reagan worked together on many things. Unlike this Congress today.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
Guess who makes bills? That's right, congress. And what has the house been doing? Pontificating and blathering and foaming and doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

so that gives Obama the green like to crown himself king?
 

michal1980

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2003
8,019
43
91
They weren't going against Congress in 80s because congress worked with the President.

Despite differences Tip O'Neil and Reagan worked together on many things. Unlike this Congress today.

So because congress doesn't give Obama everything he wants, he takes the ball and goes home?

Why have congress if the President can just make up laws?
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
If GOP goes nativist, it's lights out for them.
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


The numbers tell the story: In 2009, Democrats had 60 senators, when you include the two independents who caucused with them; in 2015, they will have 45. In 2009, Democrats had 256 members of the House; in 2015, they will have 192. In 2009, Democrats had 28 governors; in 2015, they will have 18. In 2009, Democrats controlled both legislative chambers in 27 states; in 2015, they will control only 11. In 2009, Democrats controlled 62 legislative chambers; in 2015, they will control only 28 (with one tie and two still undecided).
 
Last edited: