Damn...taking political pandering to a whole new level...

[CosmicCowboy]

If you don't believe me, here are OBAMA'S OWN WORDS LAST YEAR...

"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."

[CosmicCowboy]

Um can you find me a law that authorizes him to take a piss?

That's not how presumption works on any level. What law is he breaking? I do not know how authorization of visas is even legislated one way or another.

If there is a law it does actually direct contravene then I guarantee you that your red team will be all over with all the lawyers they have laying about.

And don't try to put me on the knee jerk red team.

Like I have said repeatedly, I am for a realistic plan that leads to amnesty for productive and law abiding illegal aliens.

This was set as a political trap. Obama knows it's an overreach, but if the Republicans fight him too hard on the overreach it will look like they are anti-hispanic. Hopefully it backfires on him. Have you noticed the *crickets* from moderate democratic congressmen today?

Remember, the Dream act FAILED under a Democrat controlled congress and senate.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you don't believe me, here are OBAMA'S OWN WORDS LAST YEAR...

Like what?

So now YOU are citing Obama as a credible source?

Also I just read today's news and I like how you guys just leave out the context of another deadlocked congressional floor.

CC all you are doing is the political posturing that you claim they are doing. Both sides are wads but you like one wad better than the other. Joy.

[CosmicCowboy]

Like what?

So now YOU are citing Obama as a credible source?

Also I just read today's news and I like how you guys just leave out the context of another deadlocked congressional floor.

CC all you are doing is the political posturing that you claim they are doing. Both sides are wads but you like one wad better than the other. Joy.

The Dream act failed in Congress when the Democrats controlled both houses wad.

[Blake]

He is writing new law by authorizing work visas for existing illegal aliens....

Why did it take you several pages to come up with this? This might actually be something to discuss.

The main point of the OP though appeared that Obama was over stepping by allowing these ”illegals” to stay......which is not even a question that the Exec Branch has the authority to grant.

Fwiw, I did find the outrage from the Reds I was asking for earlier:

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/23...ath-of-office-

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The Dream act failed in Congress when the Democrats controlled both houses wad.

It's interesting how butthurt you have been lately. you been doing alright, holmes?

And all manner of things have 'failed' through the same political obstructionism that we have seen from both sides this entire presidency.

The dream act in its current iteration is being obstructed from being brought to a vote.

Failed is just a spin phrase. Senate GOP use of the filibuster is another way to term it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092104918.html

The so-called Dream Act to grant permanent residency to immigrants who were brought to the United States as children and who have completed some time in college or in the armed forces has been a sought-after goal for Democrats, who attached the measure to an important defense spending bill. Republicans used a procedural vote to block the bill.

You have been quite the partisan hack lately. It is election season I guess.

[ElNono]

I don't know how current law handles that...we will have to ask El Nono how it worked for him when he was here on his work visa...still, without voter ID and proof of citizenship to register to vote it's kind of academic, isn't it?

Basically, both the driver's license and SS card I had while I had a work visa stated they were only valid with INS/DHS authorization. Since you require one or the other to actually register to vote, it's fairly simply to determine who's trying to illegally register.

IIRC, attempting to register to vote when you're not a citizen is considered voter fraud, a felony.

[ElNono]

He has no cons utional authority to start writing and rewriting laws from the White House.

This DOES NOT fall within his power as President.

I think where you're going wrong is in the part where he's rewriting laws... The law doesn't "mandates" deportation, IIRC. The law says that upon finding an illegal alien, authorities should start "deportation proceedings".

Now, deportation does not mean immediate expulsion from the country. Deportation is an administrative process where a prosecutor for the government requests an immigration judge for such expulsion based on certain evidence (ie: lack of proper visa, lack of evidence of citizenship). Aliens can sometimes appeal such rulings too, and even ask to be paroled into the country while such appeals are pending. Prosecutors might choose to drop cases entirely, judges might rule against expulsion. So, there's plenty of la ude as far as "the process" goes.

[ElNono]

Oh, and BTW, I completely abhor this kind of election-based bull . As a former legal alien, who always did everything legally, it's ing bull .

[ElNono]

As far as the work permit stuff, I just can't think that's legal. That said, I'm not very familiar with that since I've always had a work visa, so I didn't have to specifically ask for a work permit. I know those exist, but not 100% sure how they're granted. You would think you're at least required to have an actual visa of some sort in order.

[ElNono]

And LOL England

[CosmicCowboy]

Oh, and BTW, I completely abhor this kind of election-based bull .

It seems like everyone but Fuzzy, Blake, and OhGee can agree with that.

Just too locked in on blue team rhetoric.

[Blake]

It seems like everyone but Fuzzy, Blake, and OhGee can agree with that.

Just too locked in on blue team rhetoric.

I'm not saying this to troll. I'm saying this as fact:

You're a disingenuous idiot.

[Drachen]

It seems like everyone but Fuzzy, Blake, and OhGee can agree with that.

Just too locked in on blue team rhetoric.

I am not sure that anyone disagreed with the statement that you quoted. From what I have read, their arguement was nothing more than "this action doesn't make obama a dictator"

[CosmicCowboy]

I am not sure that anyone disagreed with the statement that you quoted. From what I have read, their arguement was nothing more than "this action doesn't make obama a dictator"

My point was that it was an overreach of executive power, not that he was literally a dictator. And yes, they were defending it as if Obama was just "clarifying" an enforcement point and not blatantly politically pandering to hispanics.

And if a President can ignore our immigration laws by executive order, what other powers do you want to give him? What if a President wanted to ignore enforcement of the Civil rights act of 1964 by executive order? He would just be "clarifying" how he wanted it enforced...Would that be OK?

[Drachen]

My point was that it was an overreach of executive power, not that he was literally a dictator. And yes, they were defending it as if Obama was just "clarifying" an enforcement point and not blatantly politically pandering to hispanics.

And if a President can ignore our immigration laws by executive order, what other powers do you want to give him? What if a President wanted to ignore enforcement of the Civil rights act of 1964 by executive order? He would just be "clarifying" how he wanted it enforced...Would that be OK?

I didn't see anyone arguing that point. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. An action can, at the same time, be a shift in the enforcement of the law and completely naked political pandering.

edit: I don't have time to argue one way or another right now, so I am not trying to get into it. I just wanted to point out that you misspoke since I didn't see anyone say that this wasn't political pandering.

Here lets try an experiment: Fuzzy, Blake, et al. (set aside the cons utionality question) Do you think this action was election year pandering to the hispanic vote?

[boutons_deux]

"the Democrats controlled both houses wad"

From Jan 2009, the Dems NEVER controlled both houses. Specifically, DINOs like Ben Nelson and other Blue Dog Dems kept the Dems under unCons utional 60 Senate seats needed to block Repug filibusters, which were threatened on nearly every Dem legislation.

[CosmicCowboy]

"the Democrats controlled both houses wad"

From Jan 2009, the Dems NEVER controlled both houses. Specifically, DINOs like Ben Nelson and other Blue Dog Dems kept the Dems under unCons utional 60 Senate seats needed to block Repug filibusters, which were threatened on nearly every Dem legislation.

It wasn't just a party line vote. Democrats voted against it as well. It would have passed if they hadn't. check it out.

[Blake]

Here lets try an experiment: Fuzzy, Blake, et al. (set aside the cons utionality question) Do you think this action was election year pandering to the hispanic vote?

It seems like everyone but CC knows what my answer to this question will be.

[CosmicCowboy]

It seems like everyone but CC knows what my answer to this question will be.

All you have to do is say it and quit your bull attacks.

[CosmicCowboy]

I didn't see anyone arguing that point. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. An action can, at the same time, be a shift in the enforcement of the law and completely naked political pandering.

edit: I don't have time to argue one way or another right now, so I am not trying to get into it. I just wanted to point out that you misspoke since I didn't see anyone say that this wasn't political pandering.

Here lets try an experiment: Fuzzy, Blake, et al. (set aside the cons utionality question) Do you think this action was election year pandering to the hispanic vote?

Sounds fair to me.

[Blake]

All you have to do is say it

Meh, you'd just find something else to accuse me of.

quit your bull attacks.

You're a hypocrite and a pussy, Spanky.

Per the usual.

[CosmicCowboy]

he can't say it. Been chuggin that blue koolaid too long.

[mavs>spurs]

You're right. It's completely reasonable to assume that the executive order will include insta-citizenship for these 800,000 folks.

who the cares about the citizenship..they will compete with young AMERICANS for AMERICAN JOBS.

I scoff at this 800,000 number. That is soooooo far from correct. I PERSONALLY know of 10-15 people this will affect..and that's in a small primarily white town. Give me a ing break "800,000" poor widdle mexicans

[mavs>spurs]

Oh, and BTW, I completely abhor this kind of election-based bull . As a former legal alien, who always did everything legally, it's ing bull .

this. thank you.