Thursday, November 20, 2014

Immigration Order Open Thread

Today is the day that Obama will have his revenge for the drubbing he got Nov. 4. Yes, folks this is our punishment for rejecting the Black man in the White House. [Their words, not mine].

Although I have another theory...

Friday, the Ferguson grand jury will make their decision on whether to indict Officer Darren Wilson and the impending riot that will insue either way. I know that it may be cynical of me, but maybe this is Obama's way of distracting the country. Or maybe he has chosen this exact moment ot distract from the whole Obamacare/Jonathan Gruber fiasco just as the open enrollment is being rolled out once again with the same problems as before. Like I said, I am cynical. Since we don't know exactly what he will do, we can discuss it as he makes his grand, imperial announcement. Maybe we'll be surprised.

Just remember these past words from the President when the Executive Order is announced...[I have added the highlights...]

Univision March 28, 2011:
With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.

Univision on Jan. 30, 2013:
Maria Elena Salinas of Univision: Now I know that you have reduced, this is another concern on Twitter, the number of deportations of non-criminals. However, in 2012 more than 184,000 non-criminals were deported. In the spirit of your push for immigration reform, would you consider a moratorium on deportations of non-criminals? Remember, these are your words: “This is not about policy. It’s about people.”

Obama: Well, I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law. And that’s what we’ve done. But what I’ve also said is, let’s make sure that we’re applying the law in a way that takes into account people’s humanity. That’s the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law. The same is true with respect to the kinds of the length of time that people have to spend outside of the country when their spouses are already here for example.

Google Hangout on Feb. 14, 2013:
Jacky Guerrero of California: Your administration has deported a record high number of 1.5 million undocumented immigrants, more than your predecessor. And I know your administration took some steps last year to protect unintended undocumented immigrants from being deported. However many people say that those efforts weren’t enough. What I’d like to know is what you’re going to do now until the time immigration reform is passed, to insure that more people aren’t being deported and families aren’t being broken apart.

Obama: Well, look Jacky, this is something that I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that, you know, I’m the president of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed, and Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.

And what that means is is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place, even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. And what we have been able to do is to make sure that we’re focusing our enforcement resources on criminals, as opposed to somebody who’s here just trying to work and look after their families.

What we have tried to do is administratively reduce the burdens and hardships on families being separated. And what we’ve done is, obviously, pass the deferred action which made sure that the DREAMers, young people who were brought here and think of themselves as Americans, are American except for their papers, that they’re not deported.

Having said all that, we’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can. And that’s why making sure we get comprehensive immigration reform done is so important.

September 17, 2013:
My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said, here’s the law when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they allocate a whole bunch of money for enforcement. But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally,” Obama said. “So that’s not an option. I do get a little worried that advocates of immigration reform start losing heart and immediately thinking, well, somehow there’s an out here — if Congress doesn’t act, we will just have the president sign something and that will take care of it, and we won’t have to worry about it. What I have said is that there is a path to get this done and that is through Congress.”

ABC News on November 16, 2014 while at the G20 Conference in Australia:
Jim Avila: Following up on immigration — in 2010, when asked by immigration reform advocates to stop deportations and act alone on providing legal status for the undocumented, you said, “I’m President, I’m not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.” In 2013, you said, “I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.” Mr. President, what has changed since then? And since you’ve now had a chance to talk since July with your legal advisors, what do you now believe are your limits so that you can continue to act as president and not as emperor or king?

Obama: Well, actually, my position hasn’t changed. When I was talking to the advocates, their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress. And getting a comprehensive deal of the sort that is in the Senate legislation, for example, does extend beyond my legal authorities. There are certain things I cannot do. There are certain limits to what falls within the realm of prosecutorial discretion in terms of how we apply existing immigration laws.

And this is just a fun montage:


Well, you get the gist. He was against executive fiat before he was for it. By the way does it bother anyone else that Obama was making statements about domestic issues while in Myanmar and Australia rather than making these statement before the American people while in the US? Please feel free to comment as Obama makes his announcement...

42 comments:

AndrewPrice said...

Excellent article, Bev! Bravo! :D

I put a lot of credibility in the idea that his timing is meant to distract us from any number of things.

I also suspect he's trying to get the Republicans to poison the relationship well before they take over. I think he's genuinely scared of the new crop of Republicans who appear to be much more politically savvy. I think he's trying to help the insane on our side lash out and make us appear insane. Then he can veto everything and spend his time on the golf course and excuse his behavior by pointing to the crazies who are foaming at the mouth. That's the easiest way for him to avoid actually needing to deal with this Congress.

Kit said...

Andrew,

"That's the easiest way for him to avoid actually needing to deal with this Congress."

That actually makes sense… too much sense.

AndrewPrice said...

Kit, It does make sense, and that's really pathetic. Unfortunately, Obama is that kind of guy who looks for excuses to avoid hard tasks and tries to make sure the other guy takes the blame for his slothy evasions.... which would be an awesome name for a rock band!!

Kit said...

"Slothy Evasions", not sure I want to know what kind of music they would perform… :)

What happens if the GOP doesn't take the bait and keeps their fringe under control?

Kit said...

Great post over at Hot Air where they point out that while immigration reform and a path to citizenship is quite popular with Americans support for it being carried out via executive fiat is not.

57% of Americans reported support for it in exit polls in the last election (a Republican sweep election). A Wall Street Journal poll found the same number, 57% support. And that number goes up to 74% when they are told that such a plan includes paying a fine, back taxes, and passing a security background check.

This is something I can back up with anecdotal evidence. One woman I know was opposed to the Rubio plan until I outlined that it would require a 13-year wait and payment of back taxes. Then she though it was ok.

Getting three-fourths of Americans to agree on any political issue is difficult. So this is huge.

HOWEVER! When asked about it being carried out via executive order the best you can get is a USA Today poll showing 42 support and 46% disapproving. That may have been a fluke as an NBC poll showing opposition to it at 49% and support only at 37%.

This means, of course, that Americans are quite willing to embrace a path to citizenship for illegals, especially if it involves requirements and hoops but they are not supportive of seeing it carried out via Executive Order.

LINK

Critch said...

Both of my contractors are Hispanic, both are against the amnesty program which they see as pure politics. Both went through the system and became American citizens the hard way. They both vote split tickets, we go to the same Catholic Church, they aren't particularly liberal or conservative...they're like most Americans.

Tennessee Jed said...

the issue that is of particular interest to me involves the claims of precedent set by prior presidents. Andrew addressed this the other day in his article. I am not a constitutional expert. This is hardly the first attempt at creating an imperial presidency, but typically it has occurred gradually, and not so nakedly or against the will of congress. I wonder if a court would consider past precedent in ruling. I would like to think not. As in the case of rape, because an individual did not press charges in the past does not she loses her rights in a future rape.

BevfromNYC said...

Kit - "...And that number goes up to 74% when they are told that such a plan includes paying a fine, back taxes, and passing a security background check."

This is exactly what passed in 1986. The Dems even promised to secure the borders....which didn't happen. Which is why Boehner has stalled the bill in the House. They want written legislation securing the borders before they will proceed to amnesty.

BevfromNYC said...

I am not sure why Obama is pathologically unable to deal like a politician. The first thing both Boehner and McConnell stated publicly was how they WANT to work with the WH. Obama won't even try. It is like watching a child having a temper tantrum that he isn't getting any ice cream as he's being handed a giant bowl.

Obama is making his address tonight at 8:00pm ET...and then flying off to Vegas. He flew to Vegas right after Amb. Chris Stevens was murdered in Benghazi too. He seems to go to Vegas a lot after making pronouncements. Should we worry he has an out of control gambling habit??

BevfromNYC said...

Kit - I think Slothy Invasions opened for Nirvana in the '90's

Tennessee Jed said...

On the question of legality and precedent, there are two interesting pieces. One by David Frum in the Atlantic, and one by Danny Vitoli in New Republic. Both can be googled.

BevfromNYC said...

TennJ - I think these are the articles of which you refer...

David Frum Atlantic Monthly Reagan and Bush Offer No Precedent for Obama's Amnesty Order

Danny Vitik New Republic Reagan and Bush Acted Unilaterally on Immigration, Too—for the Same Reason That Obama Will

interesting

AndrewPrice said...

Kit, These days, Slothy Invasions would play the same manufactured garbage everyone else plays... they would basically be Maroon 5.1.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, Interesting articles, thanks for pointing them out. At this point, the justifications Obama will use keep changing, so it's hard to tell exactly what he's doing. In any event, I don't see a legal justification, I don't see the authority, and I don't see that he's made a credible case for why he needs to act. Even a lot of the Democrats are telling him that he should wait.

Writer X said...

That he's actually touting this as a celebration announcement in Vegas is the icing on this liar's cake. The Republican presidential candidates need to tie this behavior around all of the Democratic presidential candidates' necks as they are all in bed together. In the short-term, however, I would like to see more outrage from the elected Republican officials. The current bunch still seems to be in disarray to me with no clear path on how to handle this guy. Either they're completely stunned or (still) afraid to confront him. Grow some cajones, already!

Koshcat said...

Great article Bev.

Hey, Andrew stole my theory! Just kidding. I don't think president narcissist has really any real concern about the poor immigrants. Everything is about the show and he is taking advantage of a lame duck congress. The primary reason to do this is to make the GOP look bad.

It wouldn't surprise me that after all the hoopla and boring speech, he will have done nothing new. And as for going to Vegas, perhaps he has another addiction-something that takes a car ride to Pahrump to satisfy.

BevfromNYC said...

Actually, Writer X, I think they are playing this well. The Reps seem to be trying to make Obama look like he's just gone off the rails in an imperial/Kim Jung Un way. There is absolutely NO reason why if this has waited 6 years, it cannot wait until after January. Obama's just afraid that he won't be able to cover up the giant riot that is brewing or his own legacy. Maybe he is trying to FORCE the Republicans to actually impeach him! It worked out well for Clinton since his approval rating was just fine when he left office in Jan. 2001

Btw, the major networks won't be airing his speech. MSNBC, PBS, CNN, Fox News, and of course Univision will be.

BevfromNYC said...

Sadly, I will not be at a tv or computer so that I can listen to the speech. Is anyone brave enough to want to report in real time? I will understand if not, I know that my mental health can't take listening to him for any length of time.

Writer X said...

Bev, it will be interesting to hear the speeches that follow Obama's Cirque du Soleil speech tonight.

Anthony said...

There isn't enough Red Bull in the world to keep me awake during that speech. I'll read about it tomorrow.

BevfromNYC said...

Anthony - I understand... ther isn't enough Vodka in the world to get me through one of his speeches...

Kit said...

From Fox News
LINK

"Determined to go it alone, President Obama will head to Nevada on Friday to sign an executive order granting “deferred action” to two illegal immigrant groups- parents of United States citizens or legal permanent residents who have been in the country for five years, and young people who who were brought into the country illegally as of 2010."

From CNN:
------------------------------------------------------
The most far-reaching changes in Obama's order will offer papers and work authorization to up to four million people who are undocumented parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, as long as they have lived in the U.S. for five years or longer.
Obama will also remove the upper age limit of 30 years old from a program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or Dreamers that allows those brought illegally to the country as children to stay, offering relief to thousands more people.
The program will cover anyone who arrived in the country before 2010 and will extend a previous two-year guarantee of relief to three years.
------------------------------------------------------

BevfromNYC said...

Wel, that's good. Anything on "border control"? Nah, we don't need no stink in' border control. Next up, Texas will actual secede...and then claim they have been here since 1845 and demand...well...I haven't gotten that far. But it will be veeeery expensive.

Critch said...

I can't get over how gullible the libs are, this POTUS had a number of occasions when the Dims had both houses to do what he wanted...but he didn't.....now he goes and pulls this stupid pet trick and they're all ready to worship him..makes wanna be sick...he did this to get back at the GOP...

BevfromNYC said...

Critch, like I said thei is our punishment for such a big rout on Nov. 4. He's not the first Pres to have an opposition Congress. Any Republican President since Bush 41 had to deal with the same and they managed to work something out. But it takes political savvy which is clear something Obama does not possess. Not an ounce. It is stunning really. He could have all he wants, but stubbornly refuses to deal as an actual adult.

Kit said...

Reagan had a Democrat House in 1981-1987 and a Democrat Senate in 1987-1989

Kit said...

Any thoughts on the President's speech?

Tennessee Jed said...

arrogant and condescending, Kit. I've long since given up trying to figure out exactly what he is thinking, but I do think he wants to be as relevant as possible, and is hoping to pick a fight with the Republicans that will lead to their getting blamed for gridlock or "shutting down the government".

BevfromNYC said...

Kit - I wanted to listen to Obama last night. I really did, but I decided a do-it-yourself root canal would be less painful.

10J - I have to agree. I have NO idea what his motivation for this is. The only word that keeps coming to mind is "punishment". Btw, this raises the "flip-flopping/I was against it before I was for it/I've evolved" stuff to on whole new level. and that level is "Face it, you stupid American voters, I lie all the time. And you buy it every single time. No truth shall ever pass my lips. And even that is a lie."

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

So after Obama made his imperial decree he says he wants to have a rational debate with Congress.

Yeah, right.

Excellent post, Bev!

AndrewPrice said...

Hi everyone! Sorry, I didn't get a chance to listen to the speech. It's been a bad couple days. I'll look into it though for next week!

USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Hang in there, Andrew.

Kit said...

Jonah Goldberg has a new article out about Obama and his immigration edict.
LINK

There is a lot of stuff on Progressivism but the first page has a great passage.

----------------------------------------------------------
Like a cannibal in a coma ward, I have no idea where to begin. It is always remarkable to me — which is why I am remarking upon it — how the only way this president can be rescued from a bad news cycle is if an even worse one comes along. This is a source of frustration for many on the right who get outraged by the fact that “we” don’t talk enough about Fast & Furious or Benghazi or the IRS scandal or the VA scandal or Ukraine/Syria/Islamic State/China/Libya/Gitmo . . . . etc. The reason some of these topics get pushed to the backburner, even on the right, is that another controversy or scandal suddenly eclipses the previous one. If I ask you to hold a bowling ball and then, five minutes later, I surprise you by throwing a second bowling ball at you and shouting “Catch!” it’s sort of unfair for me to expect you not to drop the ball. (“That may be the worst thing you’ve ever written” — The Couch.)

Phase One of Grubergate came to an end not because the White House or Jonathan Gruber or his legions of activist-journalist homunculi offered the necessary answers or contrition, but because a bigger mess came along. The current fight over Obama’s immigration diktat will probably end when the White House throws Israel under the Mother of All Buses by striking a deal with Iran (already Bibi Netanyahu must feel like Joe Pesci as he walked into the room with plastic sheets on the floor in Goodfellas). The subsequent controversy over that will likely subside when the administration reveals it has been running an illegal dogfighting ring in the White House basement. That brouhaha will conclude when Biden lets it slip that he routinely hunts human beings for sport on the grounds of the Vice President’s residence.
----------------------------------------------------------

Kit said...

ISIL releases 3 photos they claim are depictions of anti-Sunni violence.

The US State Department's anti-ISIS twitter feed, Think Again Turn Away (@ThinkAgain_DOS), replies that the middle photo, which ISIS claims depicts sexual assault, is actually from Hungarian Porn.
LINK

First Response: Haha! ISIS noobs! They are such losers.





Second Response: How the hell did the State Department employee know that was from Hungarian porn?

Anthony said...

Kit,

'Offer up staged porn as evidence of US atrocities' is a trick terrorists tried after Abu Gharib.

How the government figured out where the image came from is beyond me, but my guess would be a variant of facial recognition software.

Anthony said...

Hilarious SNL parody of Obama's executive action on immigration. It is based on an old Schoolhouse Rock segment 'I'm Just a Bill'.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/snls-obama-shoves-the-schoolhouse-rock-bill-down-the-capital-steps/

Its early days, but his immigration decree seems to be playing out the same way everything Obama does plays out nowadays. His enemies are incensed, his friends are disappointed and the public doesn't care.

AndrewPrice said...

Thanks Ben. This time we changed my medication and I had a really bad reaction to it -- spent two days shaking and trying hard to stay conscious. Scared the wife to death. Ug. If it's not one thing it's another.

Kit said...

"Its early days, but his immigration decree seems to be playing out the same way everything Obama does plays out nowadays. His enemies are incensed, his friends are disappointed and the public doesn't care."

As Jonah Goldberg said, "the only way this president can be rescued from a bad news cycle is if an even worse one comes along."

Critch said...

Does it strike anyone here as really funny that Charles Manson has had a better week than Bill Cosby?

Kit said...

Critch,

Two stories I have been trying hard to avoid.

BevfromNYC said...

Critch - That is SO true! On a side note - if true, how is possible that Cosby has gotten away with this all these years? I don't get it. However I am not willing to condemn him just yet.

AndrewPrice said...

Critch and Bev, Cosby is a story that makes me really sad.

In terms of condemning him, I won't either because it's not clear to me how many of these women simply traded sex for casting and now want to call it rape.

As for how he got away with it, it's amazing how much the media will overlook for people on the "in" until they come out as conservatives... then all bets are off.

Post a Comment