This.

One of President Obama's primary objectives from his first presidential campaign was to overhaul our current immigration system which is outdated, outmoded, and completely ineffectual...and has been for decades.

Congress and presidents for decades have known this. They are also aware that tackling immigration can be a death knoll for one's political career, which is why everyone steers clear of it and it is an issue that presidents ONLY address in their 2nd term...if at all.

President Obama has made no bones about it: pass a bill, and he'll rescind the Acts. His signatures on these Acts today simply remove another day of doing nothing about the problem.

It will be up to the newly Republican-headed House and Senate to decide if they'd actually like to step up to the plate and do the job they've been elected - and are paid - to do, or if they'd like to spend 25 MORE months (on top of the previous 71 months) avoiding doing their job while receiving pay by concentrating on suing the president and/or working to impeach him before his second and final term in office ends on January 20, 2017.



They could, instead, simply pass a workable immigration bill.

Since that's their job which they get paid TO do, and since they're already THERE on Capitol Hill, anyway...it seems to quickest, easiest, most effective, and most cost-conscious way to go.


For the record, I'm not a big fan of many of President Obama's solutions to this as he's outlined them and I'm seeing HUGE problems 3 years from now if the Acts DO stand. But, I DO see what he's doing and what his game plan is - forcing the people in Congress who ARE able to be re-elected for many, many MORE terms TO finally do something, after decades of stalling and stone-walling.



He promised he'd Change the Way Washington Does Business, and he's delivering ON that promise..."whether we like it or not".

Personally, I'm fricken thrilled and the fact that it's causing [some] others such discomfort, is simply the sweetest icing on an already perfectly-baked cake.

Nahhhh...it's the same thing that was done under Reagan in 1986 with his penning of the Immigration Reform and Control Act

AND

the same thing that was done with George H. W. Bush's Immigration Act of 1990

except

that President Obama's Act doesn't provide blanket amnesty (as theirs did); it merely provides a path to (NOT a guaranty of) remaining here legally.


http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/obama-s-executive-action-isn-t-outrageous-it-s-how-immigration-reform-gets-done-20141120

The links posted by Conrad should be read by anyone truly interested in how the law is written, has worked in the past, and how it is supposed to work.

The power to regulate immigration was solely vested in Congress by the Constitution. Anyone that thinks Obama's actions are legal does not understand how immigration laws work. Obama has no authority to change whole classes of illegal aliens to legal or even anything close.

The real reason Obama took this action is political. If he actually cared about changing the system, he would have done so during his first two years in office while he had both houses of Congress to do his bidding. He actually promised to get Congress to change immigration law in his first 100 days of office, but then proceeded to not address the issue.

He is attempting to goad the Republicans in doing something, like impeachment, that they cannot win and will make them look foolish for the next election. The truth is, impeachment is the normal cure for improper actions of a public official but there are still enough Democrats in the Senate to cause an impeachment trial to fail.

Progressive Democrats have wanted open borders from day one. The flood of illegals represent a class of voters that are heavily Democratic. If enough illegals can be given citizenship or can have enough children to change the demographics of The US, it is thought that the country could permanently be turned to vote Democratic.

Obama's speech will lure many more illegals to our country who will not be turned away and will take jobs from citizens.

There is no hope of "fixing the immigration system" til the borders are closed.

And to those who tell the "big lie" that illegals only take jobs citizens do not want ... go to the nearest construction project in a city such as Houston and see how many plumbers, concrete finishers, iron workers, carpenters, and other tradesmen who can speak English.

Only after they successfully and retroactively impeach Reagan and the first Bush.


It's a tool that's been used repeatedly throughout our history as a nation. The ONLY difference THIS time is it's a black POTUS holding the pen.

I think it was Esebulldog who posted those Links!
Somehow they got mixed up with my Post,so I can't take credit for them!

I see lots of truth in both these quotes...So where is the middle ground and what are the real pros and cons?...The way I see it, there is only one pro and one con....The pro is Obama has started the immigration ball rolling even if it is uphill and the con is by going around Congress he increases the chances of delaying permanent reform because executive orders are not always permanent...They can be overturned in court, they can be overridden by a new president or they can be undone through the legislative process...

Saying Congress could simply pass a workable immigration law is oversimplifying what will be a very complicated process BECAUSE it has gone unaddressed for TOO long, but by the same token, closing the borders is not the right answer either...

Sherrie, the real truth is this administration has been a partisan nightmare for many reasons, the least of which is racism....

"We're not tired," said one man speaking from the platform. "On the contrary, we are mad with this Mexican government and its entire structure, because it has not done anything but deceive the families."

Angry Mexicans protest over 43 missing students
2 hours ago, Nov.21, 2014

Allen West
1 hr �

The movie "Exodus: Gods and Kings" will soon be released with a new look at the story of Moses. I must admit the "Ten Commandments" with Charleston Heston and Yul Brynner is a classic, and one of my favorites. It seems that President Barack Hussein Obama liked that movie as well apparently modeling himself after Brynner's character Ramses and the infamous line, "So let it be written, so let it be done. " Ramses didn't have a phone but he did have a pen.

No more so than President Reagan and President George (H. W.) Bush.



Factually-(and historically-)speaking, that is.



*Odd* no one's bothered by THOSE Acts.

Except President Obama's plan doesn't provide amnesty to ANYone, though Reagan's and Bush's plans did.


Guess Reagan and Bush were simply pandering to the Haitian vote then,



then. Ergo-ipso-facto.

a Special Thanks goes to Dirty Harry for holding up any Votes on any Bill to fix Immigration!

They went through Congress,that's the difference!

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/the-weak-argument-defending-executive-amnesty/382906/

http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/20/no-reagan-did-not-offer-an-amnesty-by-lawless-executive-order/

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.

"Personally, I'm fricken thrilled and the fact that it's causing [some] others such discomfort, is simply the sweetest icing on an already perfectly-baked cake."


Wow, that's how a third grader thinks. We will see how you feel in two months when Congress and the Senate block all of Obama's political appointments and initiatives until he reverses this action. This is just one of the few actions they announced they are going to take.

There's a little difference. President Reagan went through Congress when he did his Amnesty and so did President Bush. Fuhrer Obama goes at it on his own like a dictator does.

Simply not true, no matter how many times you re-type it.


"In 1986, Mr. Reagan signed the so-called amnesty bill passed by Congress that granted legal status to three million undocumented immigrants, and then acted on his own the following year to expand it to about 100,000 more...

...Mr. Bush moved in 1990 to allow 1.5 million undocumented spouses and children of immigrants who were in the process of becoming legal permanent residents to stay in the country and obtain work permits..." No act of Congress necessary...nor obtained.



President Obama's Act provides amnesty to absolutely no one. Zilch. Nada. There is no amnesty to ANYONE included in the plan he's signing.[/size=18]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/us/politics/obamas-immigration-decision-has-precedents-but-may-set-a-new-one.html?_r=0

To do away with it, Congress need only sign a bill of their own. Should be easy enough to do, once the new Conservative-controlled House and Senate arrive in town,


riiiiiight?

Nahhhh...President Obama is NOT going to erase his ink from the Act as Congress holds him hostage over non-funding of programs, failing to pass a budget, and/or failing to approve appointees.


He's said, quite clearly, the Act goes away the moment Congress passes an Immigration Bill OR when a new POTUS assumes office and does away it, whichever comes first.

Again and for the last time, the quickest, easiest, and most expeditious way to undue this Act which never should have BEEN signed is simply to pass an Immigration Bill withIN Congress, like they're paid to do.

Or, instead of doing the job they're paid to do, they can continue to stutter, stamp little feet, and stone-wall.


It appears they have the approval of most of the people participating in THIS thread TO continue to do nothing for a few MORE decades, if need be.




*Funny*, according to you erudite folk, I'm simply "a libtard", and even I don't like MY taxpayer dollars being wasted like this.