Obama to keep 5 million illegals in The USA

[calfoxwc]

Because it is hypocritical to decry Obama when Reagan did the same thing OS

*****************************************************

Os, that isn't true, read what I posted:

Note: Read this carefully, and note that the dems controlled the House of Reps for the first

six years of Reagan's presidency, and the last two years, they also controlled the Senate.

http://thefederalist...xecutive-order/

[calfoxwc]

These Reagan and Bush 41 executive actions were obviously different than what Obama is doing now. They were trying to implement a complicated amnesty that Congress had already passed. Congress’ action was a form of immigration relief that obviously fit within our constitutional system. Moreover, Congress left a gap when it came to immediate family members, including minor children, of individuals who qualified for the amnesty. Presidents Reagan and Bush 41 forbore from deporting people in that select group.

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.

Obama, in contrast to Reagan and Bush 41, is not trying to implement a lawfully created amnesty. There has been no congressional amnesty. In fact, there has been no immigration action from Congress in the past few years except the post-9/11 REAL ID Act of 2005, which made it harder, not easier, for aliens to qualify for immigration relief.

More than that, Congress declined to pass a legalization of the type Obama is issuing during both Obama’s term and in a hotly-contested bill during President Bush 43′s term.

Thus, 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.

The progressive media’s claims otherwise are blatant lies, relying on their readers’ ignorance of events in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Such attempts should be rejected wherever they are found.

If Obama wants to justify his lawless immigration action, he will have to do it some other way than citing (blaming, more like) prior Republican presidents. They, to their credit, were trying to implement Congress’ will. Obama, on the other hand, has declared that his government will act despite Congress, or, I suspect, to spite Congress. Such pettiness finds no support in the presidencies of Reagan and Bush.

[Osiris]

 

Because it is hypocritical to decry Obama when Reagan did the same thing OS

*****************************************************

Os, that isn't true, read what I posted:

Note: Read this carefully, and note that the dems controlled the House of Reps for the first

six years of Reagan's presidency, and the last two years, they also controlled the Senate.

http://thefederalist...xecutive-order/

 

 

Thanks Cal, I read it and can definitely see your point now. I thought it was the amnesty that upset people but it seems more so the unilateral actions of Obama.

[WalterWhite]

I would gladly import millions of Mexicans if it means we can export Muslims.

[calfoxwc]

Come on, walter. If we were all in the army on this board, and in combat with terrorists,

the only guys who we couldn't trust to not turn and run, would be Vag and Woodypeckerhead.

 

it is NOT ALL MUSLIMS.

 

dammit...

[calfoxwc]

Meanwhile, the immigration issue gets serious:

 

https://screen.yahoo.com/snl/capital-hill-cold-open-074234364.html

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Good one Cal.