Author Topic: So immigration...  (Read 60050 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #350 on: November 21, 2014, 01:23:30 PM »
I don't know that much about Obama's executive orders, or those of his predecessors.

No offense, but that much is pretty clear.

I was asking if the substance of his orders differed substantially from other presidents'.

Yes. The President just exempted, on its face, approximately 5 million illegal immigrants from our immigration laws. In reality, he has all but nullified existing immigration law because it will be nearly impossible to disprove how long an illegal immigrant has been here. A nullification of law of this level by executive order is without precedent. The New York Times, for example, tries its best to gloss over Obama's overreach, but must concede that an executive nullification of this scope is without precedent.

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

Quote
President Obama’s action to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation and grant them work permits opens a new front in the decades-long debate over the scope of presidential authority.

Although Mr. Obama is not breaking new ground by using executive powers to carve out a quasi-legal status for certain categories of unauthorized immigrants — the Republican Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush all did so — his decision will affect as many as five million immigrants [it will actually be a lot more as I explain above], far more than the actions of those presidents.

Mr. Obama’s action is also a far more extensive reshaping of the nation’s immigration system.

“The magnitude and the formality of it is arguably unprecedented,” said Peter J. Spiro, a Temple University law professor. “It’s fair to say that we have never seen anything quite like this before in terms of the scale.”

The breadth of Mr. Obama’s decision is already raising serious legal and constitutional questions, fueling Republican charges of imperial overreach and worries among some Democrats of future fallout.

...
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #351 on: November 21, 2014, 01:31:08 PM »
Alright, thanks for the answer.
:adios:

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #352 on: November 21, 2014, 01:55:11 PM »
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #353 on: November 21, 2014, 01:57:15 PM »


Anyone using quantity of executive orders issued by prior offices as a metric to defend this action is a rough ridin' nitwit.

Willy nilly enforcement of laws, reinterpretation and effective amendment of laws is not acceptable, and furthers the totalitarian police state we all should fear and our Constitution seeks to protect us from.

The presence of illegal aliens on our sovereign soil is not a rough ridin' foreign policy matter, that is the dumbest rough ridin' position you can take.

Illegal aliens are not immigrants and have not immigrated. They are tresspassers. These are rudimentary concepts.

I wasn't using the number to defend it. I don't know that much about Obama's executive orders, or those of his predecessors. I was asking if the substance of his orders differed substantially from other presidents'. You obviously think so based on something, not sure what though.

Your first sentence is belied by the second and third.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #354 on: November 21, 2014, 01:58:31 PM »
this seems more like a laissez faire attitude than "imperialism".

Ah yes, the invisible hand of affirmatively ignoring the rule of law. GMAFB
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Mr Bread

  • We Gave You Bruce
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 7867
  • I've distressing news.
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #355 on: November 21, 2014, 02:16:23 PM »
Quote
a letter Thursday night signed by 10 of the nation’s top legal and constitutional scholars, including Laurence H. Tribe of Harvard, a noted liberal, and Eric Posner of the University of Chicago, a conservative, that called the new policy “lawful” and “within the power of the executive branch.”

 :eek:
My prescience is fully engorged.  It throbs with righteous accuracy.  I am sated.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #356 on: November 21, 2014, 02:29:36 PM »
A noted liberal

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #357 on: November 21, 2014, 02:36:25 PM »
I woke up this morning feeling a little less free.  Now I know why.

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7626
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #358 on: November 21, 2014, 02:48:23 PM »
I woke up this morning feeling a little less free.  Now I know why.

must be that extra 25% you are being forced to pay for obamacare.

Offline Mr Bread

  • We Gave You Bruce
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 7867
  • I've distressing news.
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #359 on: November 21, 2014, 02:54:10 PM »
We're not really sure here Mr. President . . . Okay, go out and get me ten legal scholars that will sign a letter saying that I'm cool on this thing and feel free to emboldened with or threaten to take away federal research money. :bigthumbsuparoundtheroom

Hey dax they released the legal underpinnings of the decision (also unprecedented I hear), you should rip that little bitch to shreds.  Really make them look like idiots that are talking out their assholes.  Go!
My prescience is fully engorged.  It throbs with righteous accuracy.  I am sated.

Offline Mr Bread

  • We Gave You Bruce
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 7867
  • I've distressing news.
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #360 on: November 21, 2014, 02:58:51 PM »
We're not really sure here Mr. President . . . Okay, go out and get me ten legal scholars that will sign a letter saying that I'm cool on this thing and feel free to emboldened with or threaten to take away federal research money. :bigthumbsuparoundtheroom

Hey dax they released the legal underpinnings of the decision (also unprecedented I hear), you should rip that little bitch to shreds.  Really make them look like idiots that are talking out their assholes.  Go!

I'm not saying they're incorrect.   The complexities in the law at hand allow for a vast array of interpretations.   I am lampooning the PR effort particularly as it relates to individuals under the employment of institutions that receive, in most cases, substantial federal funding.   Sorry that was confusing for you (not really sorry).

Tap out noted. :surprised:
My prescience is fully engorged.  It throbs with righteous accuracy.  I am sated.

Offline Mr Bread

  • We Gave You Bruce
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 7867
  • I've distressing news.
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #361 on: November 21, 2014, 03:10:42 PM »
You can't tap out of a fight you never entered.

Sorry bro, just facts.

Well you said they weren't sure and I was all but they told everybody their basis for doing what they did and I was all go get 'em dax and you were all no no thanks I can't.  It seemed like when given the opportunity to address the facts you begged off.  Then I duly noted your tap out. :frown:
My prescience is fully engorged.  It throbs with righteous accuracy.  I am sated.

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7626
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #362 on: November 21, 2014, 04:00:57 PM »
Golly, does anyone know why we didn't get immigration reform back when Dems controlled Congress (and of course the Oval Office)?

Because less than 38% of Americans think its even somewhat a good idea?  :dunno:

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #363 on: November 21, 2014, 04:07:35 PM »
To be fair, the Dem Congress had to devote all their energy those first couple years to not reading the Obamacare legislation.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Yard Dog

  • Baller on a Budget
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2468
  • I am DC Cat
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #364 on: November 21, 2014, 04:09:28 PM »
To be fair, the Dem Congress had to devote all their energy those first couple years to not reading the Obamacare legislation.

 :facepalm: :ROFL:

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #365 on: November 21, 2014, 05:59:06 PM »
I've got a question for goEMAW lawyers,  so we have a ton of laws on the books, some really good ones like don't murder anyone that we enforce real well, some really old ones that nobody cares about and nobody tries to enforce, and some that involve current political issues like immigration, smoking pot, sodomy etc.  This all seems like a very inconsistent mess, how can we as americans know which laws we really have to obey are? Turning on and off prosections of lawbreaking individuals and corporations seems like a scenario begging for corruption.  What is the solution to my perceived problems?
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #366 on: November 21, 2014, 06:01:17 PM »
I've got a question for goEMAW lawyers,  so we have a ton of laws on the books, some really good ones like don't murder anyone that we enforce real well, some really old ones that nobody cares about and nobody tries to enforce, and some that involve current political issues like immigration, smoking pot, sodomy etc.  This all seems like a very inconsistent mess, how can we as americans know which laws we really have to obey are? Turning on and off prosections of lawbreaking individuals and corporations seems like a scenario begging for corruption.  What is the solution to my perceived problems?

Edify yourself.  #CurrentEvents

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #367 on: November 21, 2014, 06:38:19 PM »
You mean study all of current law and figure out how strict my local, state, and federal governments are going to be about stuff currently?
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #368 on: November 21, 2014, 06:44:51 PM »
You mean study all of current law and figure out how strict my local, state, and federal governments are going to be about stuff currently?
If you plan on participating in questionably legal activities, yes.

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #369 on: November 21, 2014, 06:54:11 PM »
What if I own a business and would never knowingly break a law, and my competitors give money to local politicians and start breaking laws that give them a big competitive advantage against me,  when I point this out after years of getting my ass kicked the pol says,"that law is not a priority for us right now, bye".
So reluctantly I start breaking the law, then bam, i get arrested and go to jail while my old competitor is retired in Barbados?
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #370 on: November 21, 2014, 06:58:35 PM »
What if I own a business and would never knowingly break a law, and my competitors give money to local politicians and start breaking laws that give them a big competitive advantage against me,  when I point this out after years of getting my ass kicked the pol says,"that law is not a priority for us right now, bye".
So reluctantly I start breaking the law, then bam, i get arrested and go to jail while my old competitor is retired in Barbados?

So, you knowingly break the law even though you would never knowingly break the law? Sounds made up.

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #371 on: November 21, 2014, 07:06:48 PM »
Totally made up, I thought you knew that, is it ok for politicians to selectively enforce laws or not?
(Pretend the laws i'm talking about are still important to at least 25% of the country)
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #372 on: November 21, 2014, 10:22:01 PM »
Totally made up, I thought you knew that, is it ok for politicians to selectively enforce laws or not?
(Pretend the laws i'm talking about are still important to at least 25% of the country)
it is common, yes

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #373 on: November 21, 2014, 10:26:51 PM »
Totally made up, I thought you knew that, is it ok for politicians to selectively enforce laws or not?
(Pretend the laws i'm talking about are still important to at least 25% of the country)
it is common, yes
The question is whether it is healthy for our country or not, and if so why?
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20946
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: So immigration...
« Reply #374 on: November 21, 2014, 10:31:09 PM »
Totally made up, I thought you knew that, is it ok for politicians to selectively enforce laws or not?
(Pretend the laws i'm talking about are still important to at least 25% of the country)
it is common, yes
The question is whether it is healthy for our country or not, and if so why?
it depends.