Obama Exec order = dream Act?

[newtothegame]

Hmmm so what if congress didnt pass the dream act...appears Obama will!!

Updated: Obama’s New Executive Order = Obama‘s ’Dream Act’

Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:30am
House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (http://lamarsmith.house.gov/) claims that President Barack Obama’s new Executive Order that stopped automatic deportation of illegal aliens is more than just a back-door passage of the “Dream Act” but actually something that undermines both the Legislative and the Judicial branches of our government. According to Rep. Smith, the new order permits:


- hundred of thousands of illegals to be given work authorizations, allowing them to compete with Americans for jobs


- a presidential task force to decide who receives amnesty and who does not, creating even more bureaucracy in Washington

- the reversal of a judge’s decision to send a person back to their home country.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-orders-his-own-version-of-the-dream-act-video/

[Tom]

Grounds for impeachment imho.

[JustRalph]

Does not surprise me a bit.

This might be just the tip of the coming iceberg

[ArlJim78]

lawless regime

[fast4522]

Every single item this man has executed during his term of service will be reversed.

[newtothegame]

Awww c'mon guys...don't ya think your being a bit hard on Obama?? I mean just because congress failed to pass it, why wouldnt a president just ignore the will of the people and congress??? geeze :lol:

[riskman]

Since Obama knows that he has little chance of getting this passed in the Congress since they lost their majority he is taking matters into his own hands. What a crock – and sadly far too many ignorant and delusional suckers will fall for this scam.Why didn't the Dems try to pass this when they had the majority? Figure that one out, guess he was too busy propping up the banksters and ruining our Health Care System.
The Dream Act is nothing but a ruse to begin with.Read about it and make your own judgement.

[Tom]

If it were not for illegal aliens, the dems would never have taken both houses and Obama would never have been elected.

They would rather populate our country with illegals who will vote for them than real Americans.

[newtothegame]

If it were not for illegal aliens, the dems would never have taken both houses and Obama would never have been elected.

They would rather populate our country with illegals who will vote for them than real Americans.
Sadly Tom, it lets ya know where there priorities lie at......

[ElKabong]

Hmmm so what if congress didnt pass the dream act...appears Obama will!!




[indent]- hundred of thousands of illegals to be given work authorizations, allowing them to compete with Americans for jobs



Dear hcap, mosty, stinky, danny, et al.....The race to the bottom has just hit a new gear. These people will drive wages DOWN.

Next time you go off on "the race to the bottom thanx to rethugs" or how Tx "leads the universe in minimum wage jobs" just know your preznit has just put the pedal to the floorboard on this RACE TO THE BOTTOM. :mad:

[highnote]

The Democrats think Obama acts like a Republican and the Republicans think he is a socialist or communist. :D

I've written here on several occasions that none of what he does is surprising. Anyone who took the time to read his book would have seen what kind of person he is. He is a centrist and tries to work with both sides of the aisle.

His constituents don't like it and no matter what he does Republicans won't like him.

Bohner is getting some of the same treatment from his constituents for working with Obama.

Bush and Reagan did it the right way. Just do whatever you damn well please. At least half the people will like you for it. As for the other half... they don't give a shit.

Obama needs to get a back bone. As Machiavelli said, "It is better to be feared that to be loved if you can't be both."

Personally, I think politicians do too much meddling in the world. People know how to cope in the world. Self rule is best. We're adults now and can take of ourselves.

[rastajenk]

He is not a centrist, but he has a pragmatic stripe. He knows he has to make public attempts to work with the other side, but nothing about him suggests he's willing to adopt more a more conservative stance because it's good policy. He's an egomaniacal left-wing ideologue, nothing centrist about him.

[Let's Roll]

Grounds for impeachment imho.
I just finished reading a book about Andrew Jackson.Back in that time they never would have let an exceutive order like this stand, especially while Congress was away from Washington.Both sides had more political sense
and would have supported calls for a charge of treason as well, especially in light of all the other unlawfull acts committed.The well being of the United States would not have been sacrificed for political correctness.

[HUSKER55]

OK,...so when do we the people revolt? What is that old saying, it is better to hang together because hanging one by one is a certainity.

[highnote]

He's an egomaniacal left-wing ideologue, nothing centrist about him.


You confirm my point. Conservatives think he is is left-wing. If you ask a Liberal they will say he is Conservative.

It's hard to be both. Like Clinton, Bush, McCain, Core, Reagan, Carter, et al, presidents and wannabe presidents tend to be closer to the center than far left or far right.

[boxcar]

He is not a centrist, but he has a pragmatic stripe. He knows he has to make public attempts to work with the other side, but nothing about him suggests he's willing to adopt more a more conservative stance because it's good policy. He's an egomaniacal left-wing ideologue, nothing centrist about him.

In short, he's a dyed-in-the-wool Marxist who loves to portray himself as a compromising, reasonable, sensible centrist. I don't believe, if he were honest and announced to the country what a left-wing extremist he really is, it would help him very much to win popular votes.

Boxcar

[highnote]

In short, he's a dyed-in-the-wool Marxist who loves to portray himself as a compromising, reasonable, sensible centrist. I don't believe, if he were honest and announced to the country what a left-wing extremist he really is, it would help him very much to win popular votes.

Boxcar


Again, this is the Conservative view of him. The Liberal view of him is that he is too far right. This is his conundrum.

The big question for him is: Are there enough Centrists to overcome the votes the Far Right and Far Left will cast for other candidates and also the votes the Centrists will cast for other candidates?

Speaking of Marxist -- he hasn't raised everyone's taxes, yet. In fact, the Republicans are trying to figure out how to raise the Social Security tax that employees pay from 4.2% to 6.2%. If the Republicans continue to back this tax increase how will they spin that in the upcoming elections?

[boxcar]

Again, this is the Conservative view of him. The Liberal view of him is that he is too far right. This is his conundrum.

But only his. The view I stated is quite accurate. His left-wing extremist base is unhappy with him because to some extent BO's hands are tied due to a little item called the U.S. Constitution -- no biggie at all to him, but nonetheless it still is a big thing to a lot of people in this country. The extreme left is unhappy with him because they want him to be more bold and if that means trampling on the Constitution, they're okay with that. But political reality says he must wax more political than either they would like or even BO himself likes. Politically, he cannot risk offending too many people. But all this doesn't change what he IS -- a hardcore Marxist who grew up in this environment, thrived on it in college and even embraced under the BLT of Wright for 20 years, etc. A man is indeed judged by the company he keeps; for bad company indeed corrupts good morals (1Cor 15:33).

The big question for him is: Are there enough Centrists to overcome the votes the Far Right and Far Left will cast for other candidates and also the votes the Centrists will cast for other candidates?

The country is loaded with the politically lukewarm and equally brain-dead. This is why I have maintained (and still do) that BO has at least a 50% chance of getting reelected. And if another RINO gets the GOP nomination, I think his chances increase greatly, for many conservatives will probably stay home.

Speaking of Marxist -- he hasn't raised everyone's taxes, yet. In fact, the Republicans are trying to figure out how to raise the Social Security tax that employees pay from 4.2% to 6.2%. If the Republicans continue to back this tax increase how will they spin that in the upcoming elections?

His move at the end of 2010 regarding the "Bush tax cuts" was purely political, and he did that to co-opt the Repugs before the mid-term elections. But this is all you're looking at, "taxes"? :rolleyes: What about ObaminationCare that about 70% of the country doesn't want? And what about all the unbridled spending? What about his more current immigration decree that is tantamount to amnesty for illegals? What about his low view of the rule of law, generally? What about his low view of the U.S. Constitution? What about him wanting to fundamentally transform the face of America?

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

But only his. The view I stated is quite accurate. His left-wing extremist base is unhappy with him because to some extent BO's hands are tied due to a little item called the U.S. Constitution -- no biggie at all to him, but nonetheless it still is a big thing to a lot of people in this country. The extreme left is unhappy with him because they want him to be more bold and if that means trampling on the Constitution, they're okay with that. But political reality says he must wax more political than either they would like or even BO himself likes. Politically, he cannot risk offending too many people. But all this doesn't change what he IS -- a hardcore Marxist who grew up in this environment, thrived on it in college and even embraced under the BLT of Wright for 20 years, etc. A man is indeed judged by the company he keeps; for bad company indeed corrupts good morals (1Cor 15:33).

Thats incorrect.

The left is very unhappy with him because for two years he had the political capital and support to pass all these sweeping left-wing reforms and all he delivered was a diluted and ineffective HCR Bill.

He is a horrible leader, both the left and right agree on that, but he isn't a "dyed in the wool socialist" thats bringing communism to America. If he was he could have made real inroads to that when he was elected and failed to do so.

Sure he isn't great for business, he wants big goverment, and would rather tax the rich than everyone... but thats not necessarily a socialist. He is a left centrist and just an all around very poor leader. Nothing more, nothing less.

[highnote]

But this is all you're looking at, "taxes"? :rolleyes:

Are you for an increase in the social security tax? I bet you are a closet Marxist. :D

[highnote]

He is a horrible leader, both the left and right agree on that,

I'm not sure I'm ready to make that claim. It might be the case he is exactly the right leader given the political economic crises he is dealing with and financial economic crises he had to deal with.

In the short term, everyone has an opinion about whether he is good or bad, but in the long term, history will be the judge.


Sure he isn't great for business,

He has acted more like a republican than a democrat when it comes to business. This is not what people expected and is why the market is confused. The stock market, traditionally, does better under democrats.

I remember when Clinton was elected after Bush I had a tough economy to deal with. The market took off.

The market tanked as Bush II was leaving office and has improved since he left, but not as much as if Obama would act like a democrat instead of a republican.

he wants big goverment,

They all do. When was the last time an elected politician reduced the size of government?



and would rather tax the rich than everyone...

Has he? Saying it and doing it are two different things.


but thats not necessarily a socialist.

If Obama is a socialist then so was George "Read my lips, no new taxes" Bush.

[Tom]

In the short term, everyone has an opinion about whether he is good or bad, but in the long term, history will be the judge.


I don't know about that history will judge stuff.
The word was out on Custer fairly soon.

I see a lot of Custer in Obama. An awful lot.

[elysiantraveller]

If Obama is a socialist then so was George "Read my lips, no new taxes" Bush.

:bang: :bang: :bang:

You argue everything I say and then agree with my premise...

[boxcar]

Thats incorrect.

The left is very unhappy with him because for two years he had the political capital and support to pass all these sweeping left-wing reforms and all he delivered was a diluted and ineffective HCR Bill.

He is a horrible leader, both the left and right agree on that, but he isn't a "dyed in the wool socialist" thats bringing communism to America. If he was he could have made real inroads to that when he was elected and failed to do so.

Sure he isn't great for business, he wants big goverment, and would rather tax the rich than everyone... but thats not necessarily a socialist. He is a left centrist and just an all around very poor leader. Nothing more, nothing less.

You need to get up to speed on his background. He brought a lot of Marxist baggage to the office. He's even taught Saul Alinsky in college. When someone announces that he thinks the Constitution is fundamentally flawed and that he desires to fundamentally transform the face of America, this hardly speaks to a moderate of centrist position. He's a black angry Marxist out to punish America for all its past sins. This is what the "change" part of his "Hope and Change" platform was. Love it. Live it. And Learn it. ;)

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Are you for an increase in the social security tax? I bet you are a closet Marxist. :D

I won't even honor this red herring with an answer. What Repugs want or don't want has ZERO to do with WHAT BO IS. Got it?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

[QUOTE=swetyejohnIf Obama is a socialist then so was George "Read my lips, no new taxes" Bush.[/QUOTE]

So this single, simplistic parameter is how you define a socialist? :rolleyes: : No wonder this country is sooooo screwed! As someone one said about the great advantage to Democracy: It's the rule of Jackals elected by Jackasses."
:rolleyes:

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

You need to get up to speed on his background. He brought a lot of Marxist baggage to the office. He's even taught Saul Alinsky in college. When someone announces that he thinks the Constitution is fundamentally flawed and that he desires to fundamentally transform the face of America, this hardly speaks to a moderate of centrist position. He's a black angry Marxist out to punish America for all its past sins. This is what the "change" part of his "Hope and Change" platform was. Love it. Live it. And Learn it. ;)

Boxcar

:lol:

Anybody with a political science major is going to be taught Saul Alinsky. That's 200 level undergraduate stuff.

[newtothegame]

:lol:

Anybody with a political science major is going to be taught Saul Alinsky. That's 200 level undergraduate stuff.
I dont believe BOX said he WAS taught Alinsky...Box Said HE TAUGHT...meaning he instructed the course......
There is a difference if that was the case!

[mostpost]

I dont believe BOX said he WAS taught Alinsky...Box Said HE TAUGHT...meaning he instructed the course......
There is a difference if that was the case!
Whether he was taught Alinsky (as a student) or whether he taught a course on Alinsky (as a professor) is irrelevant. A student should learn all aspects of political thought. A teacher does not have to believe the doctrine he is teaching. I am sure there are many courses on Fascism and Nazi Germany in our colleges. This does not mean our universities are filled advocates for Adolph Hitler.

[mostpost]

Grounds for impeachment imho.
In the Constitution.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Nothing in there about if Tom doesn't like his policies. :rolleyes:

[elysiantraveller]

Hate to agree with mosty on this but Saul Alinsky is commonly found in any MPT syllabus.

[mostpost]

Awww c'mon guys...don't ya think your being a bit hard on Obama?? I mean just because congress failed to pass it, why wouldnt a president just ignore the will of the people and congress??? geeze :lol:

Congress did not fail to pass it. S952 has not yet come up for a floor vote.
Nor has HR1842
Furthermore, Obama did not halt the deportation of illegal immigrants, he halted the automatic deportation. Now, each case will be looked at individually and priority will be given to those with criminal records or those accused of a crime.

Also, I have reason to question that this was an Executive order, rather than just a change in policy.

The President is not ignoring the will of the people. You see, your opinion is not the will of the people.
54% of likely voters favor passage of the Dream Act. (CNN)
52% according to Rasmussen.

[mostpost]

Hate to agree with mosty on this but Saul Alinsky is commonly found in any MPT syllabus.
I thought I was agreeing with you. :confused: :confused:

[hcap]

Whether he was taught Alinsky (as a student) or whether he taught a course on Alinsky (as a professor) is irrelevant. A student should learn all aspects of political thought. A teacher does not have to believe the doctrine he is teaching. I am sure there are many courses on Fascism and Nazi Germany in our colleges. This does not mean our universities are filled advocates for Adolph Hitler.Sort of like tuning into El Rushbo or watching Glen Beck. :lol:

[boxcar]

:lol:

Anybody with a political science major is going to be taught Saul Alinsky. That's 200 level undergraduate stuff.

You're right! And if anyone on the planet is eminently qualified to teach the course, it would be BO. Him teaching the course fits right in nicely with his Marxist profile.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I thought I was agreeing with you. :confused: :confused:

This is great: Neither Frick or Frack know who is agreeing with whom. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Nothing in there about if Tom doesn't like his policies.

Failing to enforce the laws of the land could be construed to be a high crime.

[Tom]

Hate to agree with mosty on this but Saul Alinsky is commonly found in any MPT syllabus.

Maybe the writings of Bin Laden will soon be an elective, too.

[PaceAdvantage]

Thats incorrect.

The left is very unhappy with him because for two years he had the political capital and support to pass all these sweeping left-wing reforms and all he delivered was a diluted and ineffective HCR Bill.

He is a horrible leader, both the left and right agree on that, but he isn't a "dyed in the wool socialist" thats bringing communism to America. If he was he could have made real inroads to that when he was elected and failed to do so.

Sure he isn't great for business, he wants big goverment, and would rather tax the rich than everyone... but thats not necessarily a socialist. He is a left centrist and just an all around very poor leader. Nothing more, nothing less.I would have to agree with this assessment.

How many of Obama's critics here have read his two books? I haven't, but plan to soon, along with GWB's recent memoir.

[delayjf]

but he isn't a "dyed in the wool socialist"

Well if the company he keeps is any indication....

[Tom]

Well if the company he keeps is any indication....

Then he's a terrorist!

[newtothegame]

Then he's a terrorist!
or maybe a preacher who thinks "God damn America" at every turn??? :lol: