|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,247
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,247 |
This ought to be good for some Obama votes. We'll let them stay until after the election, anyway.  Between Napolitano and Holder, our justice system is in the crapper. Washington Times Bowing to pressure from immigrant rights activists, the Obama administration said Thursday that it will halt deportation proceedings on a case-by-case basis against illegal immigrants who meet certain criteria, such as attending school, having family in the military or having primary responsible for other family members’ care. The move marks a major step for President Obama, who for months has said he does not have broad categorical authority to halt deportations and said he must follow the laws as Congress has written them. But in letters to Congress on Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she does have discretion to focus on “priorities” and that her department and the Justice Department will review all ongoing cases to see who meets the new criteria. “This case-by-case approach will enhance public safety,” she said. “Immigration judges will be able to more swiftly adjudicate high-priority cases, such as those involving convicted felons.” The move won immediate praise from Hispanic activists and Democrats who had strenuously argued with the administration that it did have authority to take these actions, and said as long as Congress is deadlocked on the issue, it was up to Mr. Obama to act. “Today’s announcement shows that this president is willing to put muscle behind his words and to use his power to intervene when the lives of good people are being ruined by bad laws,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, who has taken a leadership role on the issue since the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy in 2009. The new rules apply to those who have been apprehended and are in deportation proceedings, but have not been officially ordered out of the country by a judge. Ms. Napolitano said a working group will try to come up with “guidance on how to provide for appropriate discretionary consideration” for “compelling cases” in instances where someone already has been ordered deported. Administration officials made the announcement just before Mr. Obama left for a long vacation out of Washington, and as members of Congress are back in their home districts. The top House Republican on the Judiciary Committee said the move is part of a White House plan “to grant backdoor amnesty to illegal immigrants.” “The Obama administration should enforce immigration laws, not look for ways to ignore them,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “The Obama administration should not pick and choose which laws to enforce. Administration officials should remember the oath of office they took to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land.” Immigration legislation has been stalled in Congress for years as the two parties have sparred over what to include. Republicans generally favor stricter enforcement and a temporary program that would allow workers in the country for some time, but eventually return to their home countries. Democrats want the legislation to include legalization of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the country, and want the future guest-worker program to also include a path to citizenship so those workers can stay permanently. Since 2007, when the issue stalled in the Senate, more than 1 million illegal immigrants have been deported. Democrats said those deportations are breaking up families and that it’s an unfair punishment for a broken system. Story Continues →
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Democrats said those deportations are breaking up families and that it’s an unfair punishment for a broken system.
That's utter BS.. There's nothing stopping the whole family leaving and going back to where they came from. It's a strawman used to garner sympathy.
And so what if they are in school? They shouldn't be in school to begin with taking up spots for those here legally.
If Obama wants to do this, I demand him to pay California for all the costs it takes to support these illegal immigrants that harbor themselves here.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,955
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,955 |
It's like saying "We won't deport anyone living in a mansion ...."
Well, they were never legally entitled to live there in the first place.
It is about what I would expect out of this administration.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,552
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,552 |
Quote:
Bowing to pressure from immigrant rights activists,
that kinda says it all... why in the hell should any president bow to any pressure from any group. let alone a group that supports an illegal activity.
I mean seriously.. this is the kinda thing that's wrong in America.
A group supporting illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to lobby for a hamburger....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Ah yes, our fine republic at work. You concoct the Dream Act which most people don't like, you put it to a vote before the United States Senate just like the law requires.. it fails. So then you just go and do it anyway by executive fiat... When do I get to decide which laws I think are valid and which ones are not? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,517 |
on the devils advocate side (which is not my side), i watched a documentary about the Mara Salvatrucha and their gang numbers swell every time we deport someone back into central america
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,483
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,483 |
Wow, we can't get this guy and his whole system out of office soon enough. 
Find what you love and let it kill you.
-Charles Bukowski
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,825 |
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Wow, we can't get this guy and his whole system out of office soon enough.
This won't stop with 'him' or 'his system'.
Sure, you may get a GOP candidate or two who will talk about some crazy scheme like a wall on the border or something ... and, of course, if they get elected, that's the end of that talk.
Tell me ... who was the last president that couldn't be considered 'soft' on immigration laws?
Bush? No.
Clinton? Nope.
H.W.? No.
Reagan? Hell, no.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
This should have been taking care of year's ago!
But as long as they ( illegals ) Will work for peanut's! It will never happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
And this is different from prior outright refusals to enforce law and procedure in regards to immigration how, exactly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Quote:
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
I think by now everyone understands why I refer to Obama as the King...and here is yet another plain-as-day example.
Some of us saw this guy coming a mile away...others - it seems - are now seeing it as well. (Not you DC)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
And this is different from prior outright refusals to enforce law and procedure in regards to immigration how, exactly?
The fact that we've done it wrong for decades doesn't mean I can't still get ticked when we announce that we are going to keep doing it wrong.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
And this is different from prior outright refusals to enforce law and procedure in regards to immigration how, exactly?
The fact that we've done it wrong for decades doesn't mean I can't still get ticked when we announce that we are going to keep doing it wrong.
Amen...and
The difference is that the King attempted to make decades of wrongdoing moot by shoving the Dream Act on everyone...the fact that the Dream Act was shot down...then implemented anyway...is pouring salt in the wound.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This isn't about immigration. It's about drafting a bill, submitting it to congress, having the Senate defeat it... and then doing it any way.
And this is different from prior outright refusals to enforce law and procedure in regards to immigration how, exactly?
The fact that we've done it wrong for decades doesn't mean I can't still get ticked when we announce that we are going to keep doing it wrong.
Fair enough, but take a look at the thread.
There's a strong sentiment of 'King Obama strikes again!' or 'we need to get rid of Obama to put an end to this sort of nonsense!'
Meanwhile ... whoever follows him will do the same type of thing, not only in regards to ignoring immigration legislation, but in other areas where Obama is presented as the problem.
Obama is a symptom of the problem. Much like Bush was. You can get angry at their stupidity, but I've found after years of that sort of thing that it's pointless ... they'll get re-elected or replaced ... either way, nada changes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,179
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,179 |
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien? A local news reporter referred to them in this way when talking about this story.
It's supposed to be hard! If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien?
An immigrant who is in the country illegally and does not have a current or pending criminal record.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien?
An immigrant who is in the country illegally and does not have a current or pending criminal record.
If you are in the country illegally, you already (should) have a pending criminal charge. This is like saying I robbed the bank, but I'm not a criminal because the cops didn't catch me yet.
Last edited by Divot; 08/20/11 10:39 AM.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien?
An immigrant who is in the country illegally and does not have a current or pending criminal record.
If you are in the country illegally, you already (should) have a pending criminal charge.
It's a civil violation, not a criminal one. There is no criminal penalty involved. The only punishment is deportation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
It's a civil violation, not a criminal one. There is no criminal penalty involved. The only punishment is deportation.
It depends. While the first offense is generally civil, there is a criminal element for felons and absconders (you were told to leave, and decided to remain.) They may be arrested, detained and imprisoned.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien? A local news reporter referred to them in this way when talking about this story.
It's a new word/phrase similar to the numerous new words/phrases we get whenever the country is gullible enough to elect a lawyer as POTUS.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien? A local news reporter referred to them in this way when talking about this story.
It's a new word/phrase similar to the numerous new words/phrases we get whenever the country is gullible enough to elect a lawyer as POTUS.
Not sure when the phrase was first used, but Homeland Security began using the term in April 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien? A local news reporter referred to them in this way when talking about this story.
It's a new word/phrase similar to the numerous new words/phrases we get whenever the country is gullible enough to elect a lawyer as POTUS.
Not sure when the phrase was first used, but Homeland Security began using the term in April 2006.
Thanks for that info...when did the use of the term become darn near mainstream when talking about illegals?
Isn't being here as an illegal alien a crime? Oh yeah...that's right...they are not criminals because being illegal is not a crime. No wait...it is a crime I suppose...but because it's a civil offence rather than criminal it's not a crime. 
Or...wait...it's undocumented immigrants...yeah that's right. NOT illegal aliens...undocumented immigrants. 
I can go on all day.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What the heck is a non-criminal illegal alien? A local news reporter referred to them in this way when talking about this story.
It's a new word/phrase similar to the numerous new words/phrases we get whenever the country is gullible enough to elect a lawyer as POTUS.
Not sure when the phrase was first used, but Homeland Security began using the term in April 2006.
Thanks for that info...when did the use of the term become darn near mainstream when talking about illegals?
Isn't being here as an illegal alien a crime? Oh yeah...that's right...they are not criminals because being illegal is not a crime. No wait...it is a crime I suppose...but because it's a civil offence rather than criminal it's not a crime.
Or...wait...it's undocumented immigrants...yeah that's right. NOT illegal aliens...undocumented immigrants.
I can go on all day.
Is terminology really the thorn in your paw?
Because take away the terminology ... and it's what we've been doing for decades.
Any time there's an immigration thread, I always say the same thing -- they're essential to our economy, and just about everyone running the show knows it. Anger regarding illegal immigrants has been an issue for a very long time ... yet no one stops to think why almost every single relevant elected official pretty much refuses to respond to it?
This isn't an Obama issue, though I know you're dying to make it one. Illegal immigration and our blind eye to it is a very long standing tradition, and one that's necessary to run our service economies the way we want them run.
When our teenagers or our down and out walk into a kitchen and ask to wash dishes and clean slop sinks, then maybe we can talk about sending illegals on their way. Until then, they're a necessary piece of the workforce.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
You only see it as terminology...when it is deceit.
My issue with the King's recent proclamation on deportation of illegals is as follows:
We HAVE looked the other way for a long time on the illegal immigration front.
Rather than fix it, we got a new word for it. Undocumented immigrants.
Rather than fix it, he tried to pass the Dream Act. What the hell, if you can't stop 'em, welcome 'em on in.
The Dream Act failed.
King:Ooops.... I wasn't counting on that. Now I have gotten the sheep's attention. What to do?
How about blatantly NOT enforcing deportation...yeah...that's what the people wanted all along.
Ignore it...call it something different...try and pass a law to make it legal...the law FAILS...oh well...do what I want anyway. How can you not see the issue with that? Why bother with trying to pass the law in the first place?
Tell me of another POTUS who so deliberately ignores the law as this guy. You can't just say "they all break the law/rule".
Give me an example where any other POTUS breaks the rule/law on an issue so clearly in the minds of the American people shortly after a law was shot down to make legal that which he is now doing anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Tell me of another POTUS who so deliberately ignores the law as this guy. You can't just say "they all break the law/rule".
Give me an example where any other POTUS breaks the rule/law on an issue so clearly in the minds of the American people shortly after a law was shot down to make legal that which he is now doing anyway.
Keeping with the immigration theme, one example would be Bush defying Congress on the Cross-Border Trucking Demonstration Project.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/2008/01/05/73237-bush-defies-law-mexico-trucks-still-roll-in-u-s/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Yeah...that was on the forefront of everyone's mind at the time. Nice try though Phil...even you have to see that Obama has no use for the laws of this land or its Constitution. From the Dream Act "enforcement"...Obamacare...registering White House visitors...moratorium on off-shore drilling...stopping Boeing from opening a manufacturing facility...Transparency...et al. You can try and equate Obama with Bush. On many things, they ARE similar. But Obama thinks he is the King and acts accordingly. He has clearly taken "it" to a whole other level.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,825 |
Well then deport, deport, deport.If they are in this country illegally than boot their arse out.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Wait, now its not just a blatant ignorance of law, but it has to be a hot button topic?
You talk yourself in circles.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,391 |
Here is what I asked you: Quote:
Give me an example where any other POTUS breaks the rule/law on an issue so clearly in the minds of the American people shortly after a law was shot down to make legal that which he is now doing anyway.
You did not do that.
No need to get all pissy and attempt to insult me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
I believe Phil is actually an Obama lover. He can't discuss the guy without mentioning Bush.
This thread had nothing to do with Bush or any other previous President. It is about the sitting President, once again, implementing a policy that was voted down in congress.
Phil just plays the same game with any political discussion, that is why I find his credibility lacking greatly. Most of these discussions read better without his continuing rhetoric about Bush and Obama being the same guy. Heck he even has it as a avatar now.
It's his opinion, but it is laughable IMO.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Phil is by NO means an Obama supporter. It *is* possible to not like both. The reason why he mentions Bush is he has this "They're all the same, so why are you complaining" mentality ... although his arguments are somewhat similar to pointing out that an apple and an orange both have skin and seeds, so therefore must be the same fruit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,363 |
I understand his mentality, I just think his rehashing it in every post is tired. He's a smart guy, but not as smart as he like to think. JMO
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,987
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,987 |
Quote:
I believe Phil is actually an Obama lover. He can't discuss the guy without mentioning Bush.
This thread had nothing to do with Bush or any other previous President. It is about the sitting President, once again, implementing a policy that was voted down in congress.
Phil just plays the same game with any political discussion, that is why I find his credibility lacking greatly. Most of these discussions read better without his continuing rhetoric about Bush and Obama being the same guy. Heck he even has it as a avatar now.
It's his opinion, but it is laughable IMO.
he actually didn't mention Bush in this thread until he was asked for a specific example, which he provided and it happened to be Bush.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
I understand his mentality, I just think his rehashing it in every post is tired. He's a smart guy, but not as smart as he like to think. JMO
It's a crutch if you ask me. The debate should not be able whether or not both parties are the same or not, but rather the merits of what is being debated.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Obama halts deportation of
illegals
|
|
