Executive action

[onejayhawk]

How did Boehener become part of an Obama thread? Should we listen to him first?

J

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If you read the first and only page of the thread all your questions will be answered

 

[Antilogic]

Honestly, I don't know what to think! I have no problem with executive orders as long as they do not countermand actual congressional directives. I don't know whether Reagan's did that or not, and I don't know if what Obama is planning to or not. But even if they did, I don't think it is appropriate to use that as an excuse to justify Obama doing it. That's like little kid ing about not getting the same toy in a happy meal as their sibling.

So basically, did Reagan's countermand actual congressional directives? Or did he issue an executive order that worked within the framework of passed legislation? Is Obama's actually going to countermand actual congressional legislation, or not?

I simply don't know the answers to these questions.

Reagan and H.W. Bush's executive actions fixed what they perceived to be gaps in the immigration laws on the books, and Bush's preceded an official fix. One (Reagan's?) was about parents staying in the country on work visas but their kids were being deported, so the president unilaterally stopped those deportations. Forgot what the other one was at the moment.

Strictly speaking, both acted "against" the letter of the law passed by Congress, but they got on the same page afterwards. I think Bush's executive action was taken while Congress was debating the issue, and the Congress passed a fix within a couple months making it official.

Since the Congress hasn't fully passed an immigration bill (the Senate's comprehensive bill is sitting in the House without a vote, the GOP House leadership doesn't want to pass that one and will not take up the tiny more focused bills until 2015), Obama is going to be acting a lot like H. W. Bush in this case. I'd assume he's trying to force Congress to take up the Senate bill in the lame duck session or pass a similar version in the next Congress, first quarter or so.

Specifically, it means the Democrats had a cow. Metaphorically it means they went berserk, ie striking out against anyone, friend or foe. It is politically useful if your own participants are not on the field.

Never seen that expression before. Might be a bit hyperbolic.

 

[Saigon]

I live to serve!

Spoiler :

Just curious, but why was he crying?

 

[Light Cleric]

Just curious, but why was he crying?

Basically any reason, it's kind of a joke with Boehner.

Politicians showing emotion and crying occasionally is one thing, but he does it way too much and it's either contrived or he's REALLY squishy.

 

[Arakhor]

Secure the border
Cut Spending
Do it now
Wait for Congress

Succinctly put. Is there a problem with that approach?

Presumably you mean the Mexican border, the one that is two thousands miles long? Even assuming you have the logistics in place for no cost to do this (which is probably highly unlikely), how exactly are you also going to cut costs whilst maintaining all this new spending on border security?

 

[bhsup]

how exactly are you also going to cut costs whilst maintaining all this new spending on border security?

Urederra addressed that eight and a half years ago. We just lack the political will to do it!

 

[Antilogic]

I think just outright annexing Mexico would be cheaper. Maybe Belize too. Then the border would be nice and short!

 

[Arakhor]

Urederra addressed that eight and a half years ago. We just lack the political will to do it!

That would be like UKIP getting lots of unemployed Eastern Europeans to give out election leaflets at polling booths.

 

[JollyRoger]

You heard it here first, folks. Warpus wants Obama to die!

Okay, moving on to my take on the whole executive orders thing.

Honestly, I don't know what to think! I have no problem with executive orders as long as they do not countermand actual congressional directives. I don't know whether Reagan's did that or not, and I don't know if what Obama is planning to or not. But even if they did, I don't think it is appropriate to use that as an excuse to justify Obama doing it. That's like little kid ing about not getting the same toy in a happy meal as their sibling.

So basically, did Reagan's countermand actual congressional directives? Or did he issue an executive order that worked within the framework of passed legislation? Is Obama's actually going to countermand actual congressional legislation, or not?

I simply don't know the answers to these questions.

Obama is working within current Congressional statutes that give great discretion to the Executive Branch in deciding whether to enforce immigration laws. It is all couched in "may" rather than "shall" and references the Attorney General quite a bit. Not that it is persuasive to you, but the Supreme Court has recently backed this great discretion. As Obama has indicated, Congress can override his executive action with legislation. Ball is in their court.

 

[onejayhawk]

Urederra addressed that eight and a half years ago. We just lack the political will to do it!

Just one of many. Who says the Republicans are obstructionist? Harry Reid deserves the hat as well.

I am in favor of open borders and a clear path to work visas and citizenship. All I ask is that the law be followed in the process.

J

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Urederra addressed that eight and a half years ago. We just lack the political will to do it!

Thanks for remembering, that was epic.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Let the stupid begin.

“By ignoring the will of the American people, President Obama has cemented his legacy of lawlessness and squandered what little credibility he had left,” House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said after Obama’s address. “Republicans are left with the serious responsibility of upholding our oath of office. We will not shrink from this duty, because our allegiance lies with the American people. We will listen to them, work with our members, and protect the Constitution.”

But White House lawyers expressed confidence that Obama has the legal standing to enact the changes. They cited previous executive actions taken by Republican presidents, including Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, both of whom signed orders protecting smaller groups of illegal immigrants from deportation.

White House officials released statistics showing that Bush’s order protected about the same percentage of illegal immigrants that Obama’s action is projected to protect — though far fewer in raw number because there were only 3.5 million undocumented immigrants in the early 1990s.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2014/11/20/9a5c3856-70f6-11e4-8808-afaa1e3a33ef_story.html

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I think 'Let the stupid begin' followed by a John Boehner quote requires having been off the planet for the last several years. "Stupid still in progress" would be more accurate. Maybe get permission from the Beach Boys and put him to music; Endless Stupid.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Republicans have gone full stupid.
Obama is threatening a shutdown of the US government again !

Undeterred, President Obama appears to be going forward. It is lawless. It is unconstitutional. He is defiant and angry at the American people. If he acts by executive diktat, President Obama will not be acting as a president, he will be acting as a monarch.

Additionally, the new Congress should exercise the power of the purse by passing individual appropriations bills authorizing critical functions of government and attaching riders to strip the authority from the president to grant amnesty.

President Obama will no doubt threaten a shutdown—that seems to be the one card he repeatedly plays—but Congress can authorize funding for agencies of government one at a time. If the President is unwilling to accept funding for, say, the Department of Homeland Security without his being able to unilaterally defy the law, he alone will be responsible for the consequences.

Ted Cruz is a U.S. senator from Texas.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ma-is-not-a-monarch-113028.html#ixzz3Jg1GEO2a

 

[Antilogic]

I found the meme FF was looking for:

Spoiler :

 

[FriendlyFire]

Republicans confront own worst enemy on immigration

Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said on Wednesday that protected immigrants would become “illiterate” voters,

“The president wants to see an angry and intemperate response, thinking the Republicans will do something that leads to a shutdown,” Dent said. “Don’t take the bait, and don’t have a hysterical reaction. We can be strong, rational and measured.”

Many conservative lawmakers, however, are shrugging off pleas from leadership. Furious with the president, they are planning a series of immediate and hard-line actions that could have sweeping consequences

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said Wednesday that Obama’s executive action should be met with a refusal to vote on any more of his nominees, and on Thursday, he compared the action with the ancient Catiline conspiracy, a plot to overthrow the Roman Republic.

Speaking with reporters, Bachmann had said the “social cost” of Obama’s immigration policies would be extensive, with “millions of unskilled, illiterate, foreign nationals coming into the United States who can’t speak the English language.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...-11e4-ad12-3734c461eab6_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Dose Ted Cruz know that it was an assassination by Roman "Republican" senators against Ceaser which brought about the downfall of the Roman Republic ?
Bachmann not know that Mexicans have a 99% literacy rate ?

What a truly stunning display of US politics.

 

[Cutlass]

It's even worse over at the public relations arm of the Republican Party Fox "News".


Fox cries foul over Obama’s Bible quotes in immigration speech: That’s ‘not proper use!’
Scott Kaufman
21 Nov 2014 at 13:36 ET

Conservatives are incensed that President Barack Obama quoted scripture in his speech last night about immigration reform, Media Matters for America reports.

“Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger — we were strangers once, too,” the president said Thursday night. “My fellow Americans, we are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too.”

On Fox & Friends, Tucker Carlson accused the president of using the Biblical quotations to prove that “God is on [his] side.” “It’s repugnant,” Carlson said, “for this guy specifically, the president who spent his career defending late-term abortion, among other things, lecturing us on Christian faith? That’s too much. That is too much. This is the Christian left at work, and it’s repugnant.”

“To quote scripture?” he added, “that’s out of bounds.”

“He’s using it to guilt someone into” supporting immigration reform, Elisabeth Hasselbeck replied. “That’s not what the scholars behind the Bible would interpret as proper use.”

Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee agreed, writing on Facebook that it “is interesting that Obama cites Scripture as the justification for him taking unilateral action on illegal immigrants.”

“It’s similar to the way that his Biblical beliefs led him to oppose same-sex marriage as a candidate for election. Then when he needed big campaign donations from gay liberals for his reelection, the Bible suddenly got rewritten.”

“I always thought that Scripture was eternal and unchanging,” he concluded, “but apparently, now that Obama is President, Scripture gets rewritten more often than Bill Cosby’s Wikipedia entry.”

Watch the video of the Fox & Friends hosts discussing the president’s use of Scripture below.

Report typos and corrections to corrections@rawstory.c

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/...s-in-immigration-speech-thats-not-proper-use/

 

[Arakhor]

Everyone knows that the Bible is off-limits unless the citation in question supports your views!

 

[onejayhawk]

Everyone knows that the Bible is off-limits unless the citation in question supports your views!

Not at all, though a certain skill level is needed.

Here is an example of how not to do it.

Dose Ted Cruz know that it was an assassination by Roman "Republican" senators against Ceaser which brought about the downfall of the Roman Republic ?
Bachmann not know that Mexicans have a 99% literacy rate ?

What a truly stunning display of US politics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catiline
Mexican literacy is 92%, but I will allow that one.​

Presumably you mean the Mexican border, the one that is two thousands miles long? Even assuming you have the logistics in place for no cost to do this (which is probably highly unlikely), how exactly are you also going to cut costs whilst maintaining all this new spending on border security?

Not me. I favor an open border.

JR was summarizing the conservative position. For once he was not sarcastic about it. Maybe he was trying and failed. In any event closing the border means the entire Mexican border, increasing monitoring of the Canadian border and stepped up time enforcement of short term visas. A remarkable amount of this is already budgeted, but not happening.

J