Obama to announce executive order on immigration

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

If Obama can executive order this I guess I could ban abortion through executive order if I become President.

Yes, winning an election to become President of the United States gives you authority to enact the policies you ran on. It's a strange concept, I know.

Which is why Republicans have the right to block his legislation in Congress. They won too.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

He promised to use them.......one of few things he has said that I believe.

To be fair, he has broken some of the promises in the past. Including, according to one Secret Service, the promise to quit using these:

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Disgusting. If Obama is doing this because Congress won't give him an up or down vote, than we should give him an up and down vote. Then we will see if he is really interested in circumventing the law or not.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Obama made an excellent speech, and it's great he's signing this executive order.  The US should live up to its reputation as the "land of the free", and NOT deport decent people who were brought here as small children.

So, should we not imprison murderors because they have small children? We don't have to deport children born here, but the parents should be deported.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Obama made an excellent speech, and it's great he's signing this executive order.  The US should live up to its reputation as the "land of the free", and NOT deport decent people who were brought here as small children.

So, should we not imprison murderers because they have small children? We don't have to deport children born here, but the parents should be deported.

I'm talking about people who were brought to the US illegally against their will, and they didn't have a choice because they were only toddlers or infants.  They weren't born here, and they're technically illegal, but they only broke the law because their parents brought them here when they were too small to understand things.  That's different from committing murder.

Misread that part, my apologies. And no, illegal immigration is not the same as murder. Way to distort what I said, though. Do we allow other criminals to skip out on justice because we take their children into consideration?

Disgusting. If Obama is doing this because Congress won't give him an up or down vote, than we should give him an up and down vote. Then we will see if he is really interested in circumventing the law or not.

Can we just have one common sense thing with immigration before you start saying "Criminals will have babies to stay here!!!1!" b/c

1. Criminals will be deported, if you actually listened to Obama's speech.

I'm thankful he did something because congress is full of terrible people who refuse to do anything that would benefit this country.

The best part is obviously:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ok. What if they don't pass the bill. What if the Senate bill is voted on and fails in the House. Should Obama be allowed to implement the law because he didn't get his way in Congress? And all illegal immigrants are criminals, no matter how decent and God fearing they may be. I don't advocate mass deportation or a witch hunt, but Obama said it himself tonight: they broke the law, and committed a crime.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Obama made an excellent speech, and it's great he's signing this executive order.  The US should live up to its reputation as the "land of the free", and NOT deport decent people who were brought here as small children.

So, should we not imprison murderors because they have small children? We don't have to deport children born here, but the parents should be deported.

You're also the libertarian type. Do you support drug offenders, even if we were to change the law and end the drug war, be required to fill out their sentences because they broke the law when it was still illegal?

Again, I do not actually believe illegal immigration is equal to murder. I deleted that line and didn't even plan to respond to it, but I must again refute the twisting of my post.

As to the question, the answer is yes. The law is the law and must be followed even when unjust or stupid. I think the future reforms to our drug laws will make the current situation a thing of the past, but until then, the law should be followed. Marijuana should be legal, but until it is, you shouldn't be selling it on the street corner.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Again, I do not actually believe illegal immigration is equal to murder. I deleted that line and didn't even plan to respond to it, but I must again refute the twisting of my post.

Twisting your post? It's completely on point with your post.

Yes, we separate murderers from their children because such a heinous act makes you unfit to parent a child. We do not separate misdemeanor offenders from their children because it does not equate to them being unfit to parent. By saying it is okay to take parents away from their children for illegal immigration and using murder as an example, it is saying you consider illegal immigration a first degree felony act on par with murder.

There is no twisting going on here. That is absolutely what you said.

From a moral stand point, I did not mean to equate murder with illegal immigration. But I can see how my post could be read that way.

Anywho, the question on deportation comes down to the parents: they can bring their American born children with them and attempt to return to the US the right way or the wrong way, or they can leave their children in the care of legal relatives here. They made the choice to leave their country of origin and have a family here, and simply put, they should pay for it.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Accirding to the latest Politico article, Mario Diaz-Balart was on the verge of securing passage of immigration reform through the HoR right before David Brat shocked Eric Cantor in his primary. At that time pretty much everyone here was celebrating except for me. A victory for the forces of obstinacy over those of compromise and moderation, even when the latter is in the form of the otherwise arch conservative Mr. Cantor, is never a good thing. For all those who cheered on Mr. Brat yet would have preferred congressional over executive action, regardless on which side you fall, this is your result.

Weren't most members already safely through their primaries by the time Cantor got upset? That was probably just an excuse. If they were so chicken that Cantor's defeat scared them off, they probably wouldn't have had the balls to bring it up so close to an election to begin with.

I'm just repeating what I read on Politico. Supposedly, Diaz-Balart had 120 Republicans on board.

I highly doubt he had that much support. He may have been able to pass the bill, but I doubt he could bring in over 100 Pubs.