Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Dear Mr. Obama, It Must Be Good to Be King


Recommended Posts

 

 

Dear Mr. Obama, It Must Be Good to Be King

 

Nov. 21, 2014 11:56am

Matt Walsh
13962728.1285175.jpg

Matt Walsh is a blogger, writer, speaker, and professional truth sayer.

 

Dear President Obama, Lord, Sultan, Emperor, Pharaoh, Caesar, God-king, Prince of the Americas, whatever we’re supposed to call you. ‘President’ alone simply won’t suffice, will it, Your Grace? We had a thing called a president once, but that lowly office could scarcely contain your Majesty. You found that you couldn’t effectively govern while constrained by the rule of law, so you superseded it, just as you’ve done countless times before. This time you are waving your mighty scepter and magically granting defacto citizenship to millions of illegal aliens.

 

Incredibly, even after all of the scandals, corruption, lies, and deceits; even after this past week when we learned about the depth of your Obamacare deception; even after using the IRS to target your political opponents; even after letting your ambassador die in Benghazi and lying about it afterwards; even after dividing the nation and exploiting racial tensions for your own gain; even after six years of incompetence, dishonesty, conspiracy, and illegality; even after every law you’ve flouted, promise you’ve broken, and lie you’ve told, you still found a way to top yourself. In refusing to enforce our borders and uphold our immigration laws, you are now guilty of the most profound presidential power grab since Abraham Lincoln. This is a landmark moment, and I’m sure you’re proud of that fact.

 

Before you ascended to your Throne on High, you were allegedly a constitutional law professor, so I’m sure you’re quite familiar with Article II of the United States Constitution. This fascinating document details the powers of the Executive Branch, but conspicuously does not grant said branch the legal ability to formulate immigration policy through Presidential decree, and also does not vest in one man the monarchical authority to decide which laws will be enforced and which will be ignored based upon nothing more than the president’s political calculations.

 

Article II is the law. It’s real. It means something. It’s part of a system, Your Highness. A carefully constructed system meant to check the authority of one branch and balance it against the enumerated powers of the other two branches. It’s this system, this delicate balance of powers and responsibilities, that keeps our society free, my King. Without it, there is no law, there is no liberty, and we fall head first into anarchy, monarchy, oligarchy, or some other -archy.

But you know this. It’s the whole point, isn’t it, Your Holiness?

 

That’s what your followers don’t seem to understand, maybe because they’re too stupid — as your friend Gruber theorized — or maybe because they’re just naive. Either way, they think this amnesty plan is about being ‘compassionate’ towards illegal aliens. It’s kind of cute, really. They look through their rose-colored glasses at the naked despotism of your administration and see a well meaning tyrant who’s just trying to help those poor foreigners find a home. The fact that you’re suddenly acquiring 5 million new Democrat voters and dramatically expanding the scope of your own authority in the process is just, in their feeble minds, an incidental byproduct of your magnanimity.

 

I’m sure you get quite a laugh when you think about how easy this is. Man, it’s like candy from a baby — or in this case, constitutional authority from Congress. You hit all the right notes to get the lemmings to cooperate. I watched that speech last night. It was a master class in obfuscation, false dichotomy, and deflection.

 

Without so much as a smirk, you claimed that Republicans refused to take ‘meaningful action’ on immigration, even though you had majorities in the House and Senate when you entered office and it was your own party who declined to address the issue. They could have passed any immigration bill they wanted, but they didn’t because they had a reelection to worry about, as did you. So you wait until the Republicans are about to be in control and you figure now is the perfect time to flood the job market with five million new workers, betraying your middle class constituency and blaming Republicans all the while.

 

Incredible. Absolutely incredible.

 

And, with no hint of irony, you attack Republicans for claiming you have no authority to act unilaterally on immigration, failing to mention that YOU have previously insisted TWENTY FIVE TIMES that you have no authority to act unilaterally on immigration. In just one example, you said, and I quote, “With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order — that’s just not the case.” A man more naïve than myself may have hoped to hear you address this blatant contradiction, but I knew better, my Lordship.

 

I did expect you to pull out the ‘prosecutorial discretion’ card. It’s an effective tactic, I’ll admit. Indeed, you do have the authority to prioritize deportations and even the authority to refuse to deport certain individuals. But sitting back and announcing that you won’t deport anyone who falls under whatever arbitrary guidelines you’ve set is a clear abdication of duty. Besides, prosecutorial discretion doesn’t give you the power to grant legal benefits or documentation of any kind to illegal aliens. That is, without a doubt, the sole responsibility of the legislative branch. Obviously.

 

And what about this notion that Republican presidents have issued similar executive orders? A remarkably brazen lie considering only a five second Google search debunks it, but you largely get away with it because it makes for a convenient talking point. As you know, Reagan and Bush wrote executive orders meant to enact and implement immigration policies legislated by Congress. You, on the other hand, have handed blanket amnesty to millions of illegal aliens directly in defiance of the legislative branch. You said so yourself. You’re only acting ‘because [the Democrat] Congress failed to act.’

 

Except that’s not how this works, Dear Leader. That’s not how a government with three branches works. Or that’s not how it’s supposed to work, anyway.

And that brings me to the most important point.

 

I won’t waste my time telling you that your amnesty initiative is a slap in the face to all legal immigrants who followed the process and waited in line. I know you don’t care.

 

And I won’t bother reminding you that overwhelming the job market with 5 million low skilled third world aliens has no chance of having anything but a detrimental impact on the working class in America. Wealthy metropolitan liberal elites might applaud because it makes them feel like they have a conscience, but middle class citizens aren’t jumping for joy over this. They have their own families to feed, so excuse them for feeling profoundly unmoved by your anecdote last night about the illegal immigrant student who’s working on her third college degree. In fact, someone should tell her that one college degree is often a waste of money nowadays. Three is just grotesque.

 

And I certainly won’t hit you with a sermon about ‘national sovereignty.’ I don’t think a left wing politician has even used that phrase since the 1800s.

And I absolutely won’t respond to the Bible quotes from your speech by throwing verses at you that explicitly denounce breaking the law and lying, which you did last night, yesterday, and every day before that.

 

But I will ask you whether you ever considered your own daughters in all of this? It’s not that they’ll necessarily feel the devastating economic and social impact of your suicidal decision to open our borders to the third world — they are from a wealthy and powerful family so they will likely remain insulated. But, Oh Caesar, your kids are still citizens of these United States, and that is supposed to mean something. It’s supposed to mean that they enjoy the advantages of living in a free country ruled not by one man, but governed justly and prudently by those duly elected by the people and divided into branches to check and balance each other. It’s supposed to mean that they will never be subject to the whims of one single egomaniac who sits in a big white house. It’s supposed to mean that they are always protected, by the separation of powers, from tyranny and despotism.

 

You have stolen that from them, Oh Noble One. From your own children. You have seen to it that your daughters will be less free than you were, and will grow up in a country less democratic and more dictatorial than you did. You benefited from the liberties our nation afforded you, and have now stripped them from the rest of us, including your children.

 

You see, Congress is elected by the people to represent our interests. Congress didn’t, couldn’t, and wouldn’t pass amnesty because the people don’t want it. It’s our nation, Sultan. Congress gets a say because we get a say. That’s the whole crux of this ‘free country’ thing. You have taken that from us, and ‘us’ involves your daughters, my Ruler.

 

This is a precedent, Oh Supreme President. Who knows where it leads? Maybe the next Republican president will follow your example and dismantle Obamacare through executive order, or enact abortion restrictions, or manipulate the tax code. The possibilities are endless. By this time twenty or thirty years from now, maybe we won’t even have a Congress. I don’t really see the point if their only function is, as you seem to think, to pass ceremonial legislation endorsing actions already taken by the Executive Branch.

 

So don’t feel that you have to explain yourself to me. Explain yourself to your daughters. Look them in the eye and tell them why Daddy decided politics are more important than the rule of law, the Constitution, and consent of the governed. Tell them why Pops gets to go around telling everyone he isn’t legally permitted to do something, only to turn around and do that exact thing.

 

Tell them why the very foundation of our governmental structure had to be subverted for the sake of sucking up to your party’s Latino constituency.

 

Go ahead. Tell them.

 

It’ll be a difficult conversation, but you can handle it.

 

Just make sure to bring your teleprompter.

 

Long Live the King.

 

 

*********************************************

 

:cowboy2:

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 9
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Dear Mr. Obama, It Must Be Good to Be King

 

Nov. 21, 2014 11:56am

Matt Walsh
13962728.1285175.jpg

Matt Walsh is a blogger, writer, speaker, and professional truth sayer.

 

Dear President Obama, Lord, Sultan, Emperor, Pharaoh, Caesar, God-king, Prince of the Americas, whatever we’re supposed to call you. ‘President’ alone simply won’t suffice, will it, Your Grace? We had a thing called a president once, but that lowly office could scarcely contain your Majesty. You found that you couldn’t effectively govern while constrained by the rule of law, so you superseded it, just as you’ve done countless times before. This time you are waving your mighty scepter and magically granting defacto citizenship to millions of illegal aliens.

 

Incredibly, even after all of the scandals, corruption, lies, and deceits; even after this past week when we learned about the depth of your Obamacare deception; even after using the IRS to target your political opponents; even after letting your ambassador die in Benghazi and lying about it afterwards; even after dividing the nation and exploiting racial tensions for your own gain; even after six years of incompetence, dishonesty, conspiracy, and illegality; even after every law you’ve flouted, promise you’ve broken, and lie you’ve told, you still found a way to top yourself. In refusing to enforce our borders and uphold our immigration laws, you are now guilty of the most profound presidential power grab since Abraham Lincoln. This is a landmark moment, and I’m sure you’re proud of that fact.

 

Before you ascended to your Throne on High, you were allegedly a constitutional law professor, so I’m sure you’re quite familiar with Article II of the United States Constitution. This fascinating document details the powers of the Executive Branch, but conspicuously does not grant said branch the legal ability to formulate immigration policy through Presidential decree, and also does not vest in one man the monarchical authority to decide which laws will be enforced and which will be ignored based upon nothing more than the president’s political calculations.

 

Article II is the law. It’s real. It means something. It’s part of a system, Your Highness. A carefully constructed system meant to check the authority of one branch and balance it against the enumerated powers of the other two branches. It’s this system, this delicate balance of powers and responsibilities, that keeps our society free, my King. Without it, there is no law, there is no liberty, and we fall head first into anarchy, monarchy, oligarchy, or some other -archy.

But you know this. It’s the whole point, isn’t it, Your Holiness?

 

That’s what your followers don’t seem to understand, maybe because they’re too stupid — as your friend Gruber theorized — or maybe because they’re just naive. Either way, they think this amnesty plan is about being ‘compassionate’ towards illegal aliens. It’s kind of cute, really. They look through their rose-colored glasses at the naked despotism of your administration and see a well meaning tyrant who’s just trying to help those poor foreigners find a home. The fact that you’re suddenly acquiring 5 million new Democrat voters and dramatically expanding the scope of your own authority in the process is just, in their feeble minds, an incidental byproduct of your magnanimity.

 

I’m sure you get quite a laugh when you think about how easy this is. Man, it’s like candy from a baby — or in this case, constitutional authority from Congress. You hit all the right notes to get the lemmings to cooperate. I watched that speech last night. It was a master class in obfuscation, false dichotomy, and deflection.

 

Without so much as a smirk, you claimed that Republicans refused to take ‘meaningful action’ on immigration, even though you had majorities in the House and Senate when you entered office and it was your own party who declined to address the issue. They could have passed any immigration bill they wanted, but they didn’t because they had a reelection to worry about, as did you. So you wait until the Republicans are about to be in control and you figure now is the perfect time to flood the job market with five million new workers, betraying your middle class constituency and blaming Republicans all the while.

 

Incredible. Absolutely incredible.

 

And, with no hint of irony, you attack Republicans for claiming you have no authority to act unilaterally on immigration, failing to mention that YOU have previously insisted TWENTY FIVE TIMES that you have no authority to act unilaterally on immigration. In just one example, you said, and I quote, “With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order — that’s just not the case.” A man more naïve than myself may have hoped to hear you address this blatant contradiction, but I knew better, my Lordship.

 

I did expect you to pull out the ‘prosecutorial discretion’ card. It’s an effective tactic, I’ll admit. Indeed, you do have the authority to prioritize deportations and even the authority to refuse to deport certain individuals. But sitting back and announcing that you won’t deport anyone who falls under whatever arbitrary guidelines you’ve set is a clear abdication of duty. Besides, prosecutorial discretion doesn’t give you the power to grant legal benefits or documentation of any kind to illegal aliens. That is, without a doubt, the sole responsibility of the legislative branch. Obviously.

 

And what about this notion that Republican presidents have issued similar executive orders? A remarkably brazen lie considering only a five second Google search debunks it, but you largely get away with it because it makes for a convenient talking point. As you know, Reagan and Bush wrote executive orders meant to enact and implement immigration policies legislated by Congress. You, on the other hand, have handed blanket amnesty to millions of illegal aliens directly in defiance of the legislative branch. You said so yourself. You’re only acting ‘because [the Democrat] Congress failed to act.’

 

Except that’s not how this works, Dear Leader. That’s not how a government with three branches works. Or that’s not how it’s supposed to work, anyway.

And that brings me to the most important point.

 

I won’t waste my time telling you that your amnesty initiative is a slap in the face to all legal immigrants who followed the process and waited in line. I know you don’t care.

 

And I won’t bother reminding you that overwhelming the job market with 5 million low skilled third world aliens has no chance of having anything but a detrimental impact on the working class in America. Wealthy metropolitan liberal elites might applaud because it makes them feel like they have a conscience, but middle class citizens aren’t jumping for joy over this. They have their own families to feed, so excuse them for feeling profoundly unmoved by your anecdote last night about the illegal immigrant student who’s working on her third college degree. In fact, someone should tell her that one college degree is often a waste of money nowadays. Three is just grotesque.

 

And I certainly won’t hit you with a sermon about ‘national sovereignty.’ I don’t think a left wing politician has even used that phrase since the 1800s.

And I absolutely won’t respond to the Bible quotes from your speech by throwing verses at you that explicitly denounce breaking the law and lying, which you did last night, yesterday, and every day before that.

 

But I will ask you whether you ever considered your own daughters in all of this? It’s not that they’ll necessarily feel the devastating economic and social impact of your suicidal decision to open our borders to the third world — they are from a wealthy and powerful family so they will likely remain insulated. But, Oh Caesar, your kids are still citizens of these United States, and that is supposed to mean something. It’s supposed to mean that they enjoy the advantages of living in a free country ruled not by one man, but governed justly and prudently by those duly elected by the people and divided into branches to check and balance each other. It’s supposed to mean that they will never be subject to the whims of one single egomaniac who sits in a big white house. It’s supposed to mean that they are always protected, by the separation of powers, from tyranny and despotism.

 

You have stolen that from them, Oh Noble One. From your own children. You have seen to it that your daughters will be less free than you were, and will grow up in a country less democratic and more dictatorial than you did. You benefited from the liberties our nation afforded you, and have now stripped them from the rest of us, including your children.

 

You see, Congress is elected by the people to represent our interests. Congress didn’t, couldn’t, and wouldn’t pass amnesty because the people don’t want it. It’s our nation, Sultan. Congress gets a say because we get a say. That’s the whole crux of this ‘free country’ thing. You have taken that from us, and ‘us’ involves your daughters, my Ruler.

 

This is a precedent, Oh Supreme President. Who knows where it leads? Maybe the next Republican president will follow your example and dismantle Obamacare through executive order, or enact abortion restrictions, or manipulate the tax code. The possibilities are endless. By this time twenty or thirty years from now, maybe we won’t even have a Congress. I don’t really see the point if their only function is, as you seem to think, to pass ceremonial legislation endorsing actions already taken by the Executive Branch.

 

So don’t feel that you have to explain yourself to me. Explain yourself to your daughters. Look them in the eye and tell them why Daddy decided politics are more important than the rule of law, the Constitution, and consent of the governed. Tell them why Pops gets to go around telling everyone he isn’t legally permitted to do something, only to turn around and do that exact thing.

 

Tell them why the very foundation of our governmental structure had to be subverted for the sake of sucking up to your party’s Latino constituency.

 

Go ahead. Tell them.

 

It’ll be a difficult conversation, but you can handle it.

 

Just make sure to bring your teleprompter.

 

Long Live the King.

 

 

*********************************************

 

:cowboy2:

 

That was the best !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O what a short memory some people have. They forget that Regan did the same thing but nobody called him king or any other nasty names. Nobody said he should be impeached. What a bunch of hypocrites.

 

No, Reagan Did Not Offer An Amnesty By Lawless Executive Order

 

By Gabriel Malor

November 20, 2014

Today is the big day, and the Progressive media is in full spin to mitigate the anger Americans are expressing about President Obama’s decision to offer legal status to millions of people who broke the law. That spin has taken many forms, including the novel arguments that the executive branch is empowered to act whenever the legislative branch declines and that the executive branch’s enforcement discretion includes the affirmative grant of benefits not otherwise authorized by law. Most recently, however, Progressive columnists have settled on an old favorite tactic: justify Democratic misbehavior by claiming (falsely, as you will see) that a Republican did it first.

 

Democrats across print, web, and cable media have been repeating the claim that Obama is doing nothing more than what Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 did first. They point to executive actions taken in 1987 and 1989 that deferred the removal of certain aliens. But, as usual for Progressive commentators, they elide the crucial facts that distinguish those actions from Obama’s. The sign that you’re being swindled isn’t so much what the con artist tells you, but what he does not tell you. What the Progressive commentariat is not telling you is that the Reagan and Bush immigration orders looked nothing like Obama’s creation of a new, open-ended form of immigration relief.

Legally, illegal immigration is dealt with in two steps. First, the Department of Homeland Security (in Reagan and Bush 41′s time, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, or INS) has to show that an alien is removable (deportable, in Reagan and Bush 41′s lingo) from the United States. Then the alien gets a chance to show that they are eligible for some form of relief from removal or deportation. Ordinarily, those forms of relief are created by Congress. There is asylum and adjustment and cancellation of removal, and so on and so forth, all set down in statute by Congress over the decades (more than a century in the case of certain waivers) in an overlapping mess of eligibilities and disqualifiers and discretionary decisions.

With some regularity, however, the existing forms of immigration relief have been overtaken by circumstances. When that has happened, Congress steps in. In 1986, faced with a large and growing population of illegal aliens, Congress created a new, time-limited form of immigration relief for certain aliens who, among other things, had to have come to the United States more than six years previously. This is the much ballyhooed Reagan amnesty. It was, unfortunately, riddled with fraud in its execution, the uncovering of which is still roiling the immigrant community. But even setting that aside it left President Reagan with a moral dilemma. Congress’ amnesty was large—just shy of 3 million people—and it had the unanticipated effect of splitting up freshly-legalized parents from their illegally-present minor children who did not qualify for relief.

 

What the Progressive commentariat is not telling you is that the Reagan and Bush immigration orders looked nothing like Obama’s creation of a new, open-ended form of immigration relief.

So Reagan, seeing this family unity problem that Congress had not anticipated or addressed when it granted amnesty to millions of parents, issued an executive order to defer the removal of children of the people who had applied for immigration amnesty under Congress’ new law. He allowed those children to remain in the United States while their parents’ applications for amnesty were pending. A few years later, Bush 41 extended this bit of administrative grace to these same children plus certain spouses of the aliens who had actually been granted immigration amnesty under Congress’ new law.

 

Congress, though it had desired to grant amnesty, had not considered and not included the spouses and children. Importantly, nor had it excluded them. So Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 filled that statutory gap. “What do we do with spouses and children?” INS asked. “Well,” the executive branch leaders said, “defer their deportation. Decline to exercise your lawful authority for the particular cases that are related to those Congress has offered amnesty.”

 

These Reagan and Bush 41 executive actions were obviously different than what Obama is doing now. They were trying to implement a complicated amnesty that Congress had already passed. Congress’ action was a form of immigration relief that obviously fit within our constitutional system. Moreover, Congress left a gap when it came to immediate family members, including minor children, of individuals who qualified for the amnesty. Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 forbore from deporting people in that select group.

 

Obama is clearly contravening both ordinary practice and the wishes of Congress—as expressed in statute—by declaring an amnesty himself. This is nothing like Reagan’s or Bush’s attempts to implement Congress’ amnesty.

 

Obama, in contrast to Reagan and Bush 41, is not trying to implement a lawfully created amnesty. There has been no congressional amnesty. In fact, there has been no immigration action from Congress in the past few years except the post-9/11 REAL ID Act of 2005, which made it harder, not easier, for aliens to qualify for immigration relief. More than that, Congress declined to pass a legalization of the type Obama is issuing during both Obama’s term and in a hotly-contested bill during President Bush 43′s term.

 

Thus, Obama is clearly contravening both ordinary practice and the wishes of Congress—as expressed in statute—by declaring an amnesty himself. This is nothing like Reagan’s or Bush’s attempts to implement Congress’ amnesty. The progressive media’s claims otherwise are blatant lies, relying on their readers’ ignorance of events in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Such attempts should be rejected wherever they are found.

 

If Obama wants to justify his lawless immigration action, he will have to do it some other way than citing (blaming, more like) prior Republican presidents. They, to their credit, were trying to implement Congress’ will. Obama, on the other hand, has declared that his government will act despite Congress, or, I suspect, to spite Congress. Such pettiness finds no support in the presidencies of Reagan and Bush.

Gabriel Malor is an attorney and writer in Washington, D.C.

 

 

:cowboy2:

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

O what a short memory some people have. They forget that Regan did the same thing but nobody called him king or any other nasty names. Nobody said he should be impeached. What a bunch of hypocrites.

 

You seem to have missed this in your cursory viewing of the article:

 

"And what about this notion that Republican presidents have issued similar executive orders? A remarkably brazen lie considering only a five second Google search debunks it, but you largely get away with it because it makes for a convenient talking point. As you know, Reagan and Bush wrote executive orders meant to enact and implement immigration policies legislated by Congress. You, on the other hand, have handed blanket amnesty to millions of illegal aliens directly in defiance of the legislative branch. You said so yourself. You’re only acting ‘because [the Democrat] Congress failed to act.’"

Next time read past the title... you might in fact learn something useful besides name calling... :twocents:

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the time we were too busy focusing on the Iran-Contra scandal.   :shrug: 

 

GO RV, and NO BV

 

Much like today when we have the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the GAO scandal, the Fast & Furious scandal, obamacare lies, etc. as well as the Ferguson riots which the administration has encouraged.

 

Right Shabs! :surgeon:

 

:cowboy2:

  • Upvote 9
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being an Independent trust me when I say I am no fan of Obummer! That being said - I blame the Republican's for this mess! Big Business is using the illegal immigrants as their cheap labor force (against the laws of the land) and no reform will EVER be passed if the issue is not brought into the light!

 

Big Business often uses third party contract companies to hire these illegals so that the companies using the labor appear clean! Everyone knows this is happening but no one does anything to stop it!

 

Face the facts - if these illegals were not making money, they would leave!

Crack down on the companies doing the hiring and you will solve our problem! :(

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being an Independent trust me when I say I am no fan of Obummer! That being said - I blame the Republican's for this mess! Big Business is using the illegal immigrants as their cheap labor force (against the laws of the land) and no reform will EVER be passed if the issue is not brought into the light!

 

Big Business often uses third party contract companies to hire these illegals so that the companies using the labor appear clean! Everyone knows this is happening but no one does anything to stop it!

 

Face the facts - if these illegals were not making money, they would leave!

Crack down on the companies doing the hiring and you will solve our problem! :(

 

 

 

 I didnt know that all big business was run by republicans  :shrug: .. Are you implying that democrats are to stupid to run a business  :shrug: ....

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You seem to have missed this in your cursory viewing of the article:

 

"And what about this notion that Republican presidents have issued similar executive orders? A remarkably brazen lie considering only a five second Google search debunks it, but you largely get away with it because it makes for a convenient talking point. As you know, Reagan and Bush wrote executive orders meant to enact and implement immigration policies legislated by Congress. You, on the other hand, have handed blanket amnesty to millions of illegal aliens directly in defiance of the legislative branch. You said so yourself. You’re only acting ‘because [the Democrat] Congress failed to act.’"

Next time read past the title... you might in fact learn something useful besides name calling... :twocents:

 

Might want to read past the talking points yourself....the Executive ACTION legalizes NO ONE. It defers deportation....sound familiar??? (“Well,” the executive branch leaders said, “defer their deportation. Decline to exercise your lawful authority for the particular cases that are related to those Congress has offered amnesty.”...about what Reagan did)

 

It does not even allow for those covered under the action to become citizens."Nothing about this action will benefit anyone who has come to this country recently, or who might try and come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive. And it’s certainly not amnesty, no matter how often the critics say it"

 

 

.As for being a tyrant....might want to address that title to Boener, who refuses to allow an immigration bill to go to the floor for a vote. If that is not corrupting the way the government is supposed to be run.......nothing is.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.