Obama plans to use his executive order power to "Fix as much of the broken immigration system as he - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Washington (CNN) -- It's their fault, President Barack Obama said Monday in blaming Republican inaction on immigration reform for escalating problems including a surge of undocumented children crossing the border from Mexico. At a hastily scheduled Rose Garden appearance, Obama said the top House Republican -- Speaker John Boehner -- told him last week that the chamber's GOP majority will continue blocking a vote on a Senate-passed immigration bill. In response, Obama said he was starting "a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress." Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Attorney General Eric Holder will "identify additional actions my administration can take within my existing legal authorities, to do what Congress refuses to do and fix as much of our immigration system as we can," the President said.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/30/politics/obama-immigration/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url]

apparently obama is done fuckin around theres literally no reason for him to not do it anyway, he's past his re-election limit.

[QUOTE=Wii60;45260735]apparently obama is done fuckin around theres literally no reason for him to not do it anyway, he's past his re-election limit.[/QUOTE] He's tired of an incompetent congress. That's what.

Play your cards responsibly, old man. Do not fuck over people in the border states because they just want protection from the Cartels.

any bets on how long it takes before "executive order overreaching obama is devil hail satin"

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260748]Play your cards responsibly, old man. Do not fuck over people in the border states because they just want protection from the Cartels.[/QUOTE] Last time I checked not all Mexicans are cartel members. Plus don't think Obama is just going to remove the border completely.

I don't blame the guy. Half his legislation has been blocked by the Republican controlled house.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;45260761]Last time I checked not all Mexicans are cartel members. Plus don't think Obama is just going to remove the border completely.[/QUOTE] Most of them are not, but when you rely on Coyotes to jump the border, you might as well be signing yourself up for doing criminal activities just to simply survive. It's the same issue Germans/Irish/Polish ran into during the 1870's and 1880's, it's the same shit Latinos are running into now. [editline]1st July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;45260768]I don't blame the guy. Half his legislation has been blocked by the Republican controlled house.[/QUOTE] That's a bad thing...? Compromise is not a dirty word.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260772]Most of them are not, but when you rely on Coyotes to jump the border, you might as well be signing yourself up for doing criminal activities just to simply survive. It's the same issue Germans/Irish/Polish ran into during the 1870's and 1880's, it's the same shit Latinos are running into now. [editline]1st July 2014[/editline] That's a bad thing...? Compromise is not a dirty word.[/QUOTE] It is when a contributing factor as to why his legislation is blocked is because "ew he's a liberal we can't support that because liberal"

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260772] That's a bad thing...? Compromise is not a dirty word.[/QUOTE] No, but when you're president and half the things you propose are shot down because the other party could give less then 2 shits about the American people, and blame you for the countries problems, it's understandable.

[QUOTE=Bentham;45260783]It is when a contributing factor as to why his legislation is blocked is because "we he's a liberal we can't support that because liberal"[/QUOTE] In otherwords, the same things that the Democrats do in the Senate. Both parties are to blame for cockblocking each other.

My only concern here is what sort of precedent it sets for a president to actively make use of EOs- which have historically existed for emergency or necessary actions that Congress couldn't deal with and which were generally used rarely- frequently and for the sake of bypassing Congress, the elected body representing the population. I get Congress is gridlocked, but if nothing else that says that the American people are conflicted. Wouldn't picking one side and more or less without majority approval or popular consent enacting their will be exasperating the situation and undermining the support of an already controversial president?

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260790]In otherwords, the same things that the Democrats do in the Senate. Both parties are to blame for cockblocking each other.[/QUOTE] I never claimed otherwise and that wasn't the message of your original post.

[QUOTE=Bentham;45260822]I never claimed otherwise and that wasn't the message of your original post.[/QUOTE] Indeed it wasn't, but that's the problem I am finding. I am sitting on the boat of, "No EO's for petty affairs!" because realistically speaking, EO's should only be used in a situation which requires it. This isn't one of those situations though. It's primarily the president shifting weight to move Democrat legislation without having to deal with the Republican-controlled House, or Democrat-controlled Senate. That is not only going against normal processes and such, but it sets a very, very ugly precedent that so you can enact EO's whenever you feel fit.

I think this shows that Obama really does care and he's tired of Congress. I know I am. I gave up on believing in our Congress a long time ago. It's not necessarily the absolute right thing to do, but it's a hell of a lot better than just sitting around trying to kiss up for Congress to do something. I don't think Obama is the best president but I don't think he's our worst. I definitely have issues with the breaches of privacy that's been going on in the government. However, I do think that he cares and has really tried, and it's a shame that everyone's has routinely stepped in both his and each other's way for progress. [editline]1st July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260864]Indeed it wasn't, but that's the problem I am finding. I am sitting on the boat of, "No EO's for petty affairs!" because realistically speaking, EO's should only be used in a situation which requires it. This isn't one of those situations though. It's primarily the president shifting weight to move Democrat legislation without having to deal with the Republican-controlled House, or Democrat-controlled Senate. That is not only going against normal processes and such, but it sets a very, very ugly precedent that so you can enact EO's whenever you feel fit.[/QUOTE] This should be a wake-up call for Congress to do something. If they don't like it, they need to take action, devise their own bills, and cooperate.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260772]Most of them are not, but when you rely on Coyotes to jump the border, you might as well be signing yourself up for doing criminal activities just to simply survive. It's the same issue Germans/Irish/Polish ran into during the 1870's and 1880's, it's the same shit Latinos are running into now. [editline]1st July 2014[/editline] That's a bad thing...? Compromise is not a dirty word.[/QUOTE] If immigration was a lot more lax, there wouldn't be a need to jump the border.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260748]Play your cards responsibly, old man. Do not fuck over people in the border states because they just want protection from the Cartels.[/QUOTE] Yeah because searching every brown person is protecting yourself from Cartels.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];45260797']And which were generally used rarely- frequently and for the sake of bypassing Congress, the elected body representing the population.[/QUOTE] Not 100% sure if I'm reading right, but if you're implying that Obama's been using his EO power significantly more than in the past, historically he's had the 3rd lowest number of orders of any president since Theodore Roosevelt. (Before the numbers were generally smaller except for a few) Here are the numbers: [img]http://puu.sh/9RRsh/65eb9e4875.png[/img] I know it doesn't show content, but anyone calling him out for using it more than others is simply wrong. Undoubtedly people will spring on the "I will use my power" phrasing as an overreach of power and question his actions in comparison to his predecessors, which is moot. You can view the content of executive orders under all presidents [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders#Consolidated_list_of_Presidents_and_Order_numbers]here[/url] by navigating to their section. Also [img]http://puu.sh/9RRwd/60512582cb.png[/img] He's issued 13 this year.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260790]In otherwords, the same things that the Democrats do in the Senate. Both parties are to blame for cockblocking each other.[/QUOTE] I've never seen the Democrats cockblock the Republicans NEARLY as much as vice versa though.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;45260750]any bets on how long it takes before "executive order overreaching obama is devil hail satin"[/QUOTE] About 12 months ago

[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;45261314]I've never seen the Democrats cockblock the Republicans NEARLY as much as vice versa though.[/QUOTE] At least not as much within Obama's presidency. I'm sure it's happened in the past, though. That's the game of politics.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;45261341]At least not as much within Obama's presidency. I'm sure it's happened in the past, though. That's the game of politics.[/QUOTE] The shit we see today is relatively new.

With the immigration bill, it actually passed in the Senate with a bunch of Republicans getting behind it, and it could pass in the House, but they won't even allow a vote on it to make sure it doesn't

Theirs a lot of interest groups that don't want to see this go through because they would lose their legal slave labor. Detaining Hispanics and throwing them in work prisons.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45260772]That's a bad thing...? Compromise is not a dirty word.[/QUOTE] It is when conservative politicians and pundits alike proceed to criticise the president because of his inaction, when actually it has been shown that this congress is the most inactive congress and has passed less bills than any other in the past century. [IMG]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/oimg?key=0AppZFNyO57k3dG50UXZWa1Q0WlV5OXhTZXZMdzRQRHc&oid=1&zx=i549ntehe1zo[/IMG] [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/10/president-obama-said-the-113th-congress-is-the-least-productive-ever-is-he-right/[/url]

There's a healthy amount of bickering that can actually be very beneficial to making sure nothing too polarized passes, and historically speaking Congress has always been slow-moving. There's instances where it's created gridlocks in the past, however, and history shows both Democrats and Republicans being all kinds of lame in a similar fashion to what we have today, although nowadays it seems to be way worse. The game of politics is really annoying like that. "I want to be on top, and my way is best. The other person is too radical or will put us on a path to failure. The other person doesn't think about the implications they will have on some people. They're destroying America. They hate you. They hate freedom. Elect me to be your representative. I won't side with the antichrist. Thank you for electing me. I will vote against anything they have to say, because they are wrong and we are right. Now that my two years are up as your representative, please remember to vote for me again. Nothing is getting done, and it is because of the other party's unreasonable demands that are not aligned with our values. The President is doing nothing but making empty promises. We should impeach him for using executive orders."

[QUOTE=smurfy;45261567]With the immigration bill, it actually passed in the Senate with a bunch of Republicans getting behind it, and it could pass in the House, but they won't even allow a vote on it to make sure it doesn't[/QUOTE] Boehner was ready to move on immigration and trying to work with the president. It honestly looked like immigration reform was going to pass. The problem was when Boehner said that for immigration reform to pass, Obama had to secure the border first. Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to work with republicans and show us that he is willing to work with us. I have no idea why, but Obama threw a fit about it, and Boehner shelved it. And this wasn't just for immigration reform, but for amnesty too! Obama got in his own way on this...

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;45262115]Boehner was ready to move on immigration and trying to work with the president. It honestly looked like immigration reform was going to pass. The problem was when Boehner said that for immigration reform to pass, Obama had to secure the border first. Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to work with republicans and show us that he is willing to work with us. I have no idea why, but Obama threw a fit about it, and Boehner shelved it. And this wasn't just for immigration reform, but for amnesty too! Obama got in his own way on this...[/QUOTE] Can't let the Republicans pass an acceptable immigration bill, they might take minority votes away from democrats

i fucking love how just about every congressperson says "we need to get moving on immigration reform" but when they get back to the hill they are going to sit on their ass till 2015 after the mid-term election [editline]1st July 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;45262226]Can't let the Republicans pass an acceptable immigration bill, they might take minority votes away from democrats[/QUOTE] ya i mean its not like obama isn't deploying surplus military equipment there already, he just had to make a token gesture to boehner and it'd be a done deal now, instead it's going to be a bloodbath put off till at least February of 2015

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];45260797']My only concern here is what sort of precedent it sets for a president to actively make use of EOs- which have historically existed for emergency or necessary actions that Congress couldn't deal with and which were generally used rarely- frequently and for the sake of bypassing Congress, the elected body representing the population. I get Congress is gridlocked, but if nothing else that says that the American people are conflicted. Wouldn't picking one side and more or less without majority approval or popular consent enacting their will be exasperating the situation and undermining the support of an already controversial president?[/QUOTE] What about the precedent that congress and the house are setting by using filibusters day after day after day?