3rdnlng Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77486.html Edited June 17, 2012 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 As of Friday, the federal government won’t deport undocumented immigrants under age 30 who came to the United States as children. It is a temporary, de facto implementation of a part of the stalled DREAM Act. Not illegal immigrants. Just a minor undocumented paper work thing. If you are undocumented, how do you prove when you hopped the fence into the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 As of Friday, the federal government won’t deport undocumented immigrants under age 30 who came to the United States as children. It is a temporary, de facto implementation of a part of the stalled DREAM Act. Not illegal immigrants. Just a minor undocumented paper work thing. If you are undocumented, how do you prove when you hopped the fence into the US? You are such a conservative dick. Go by what they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 A White House official said the strategy is the result of a stalemate in Washington. “We we work to achieve our policy goals in the most effective and appropriate way possible,” the official said. “Often times Congress has blocked efforts (ie [No Child Left Behind] and DREAM) and we look to pursue other appropriate means of achieving our policy goals. Sometimes this makes for less than ideal policy situations - such as the action we took on immigration - but the president isn’t going to be stonewalled by politics, he will pursue whatever means available to do business on behalf of American people.” It's always interesting when they tell the truth. I'm guessing this WH official wishes he could have that onw back. to paraphrase: Basically, Obama's not going to let this whole bicameralism, democratic republicanism, and separation of powers get in the way of doing whatever he damn well pleases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) A White House official said the strategy is the result of a stalemate in Washington. "We we work to achieve our policy goals in the most effective and appropriate way possible," the official said. "Often times Congress has blocked efforts (ie [No Child Left Behind] and DREAM) and we look to pursue other appropriate means of achieving our policy goals. Sometimes this makes for less than ideal policy situations - such as the action we took on immigration - but the president isn't going to be stonewalled by politics, he will pursue whatever means available to do business on behalf of American people." It's always interesting when they tell the truth. I'm guessing this WH official wishes he could have that onw back. to paraphrase: Basically, Obama's not going to let this whole bicameralism, democratic republicanism, and separation of powers get in the way of doing whatever he damn well pleases. Yes, I'm sure she meant to say "North American people." What a slip of the tongue. This latest dictate from the Imperial BO certainly isn't in the best interest of the United States citizens. I'm sure it'll make it lots easier for US kids to get into college and get a job. Winning The Future, BO. Winning The Future. I swear. He really IS Putney Swope after all. Edited June 17, 2012 by Nanker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Basically, Obama's not going to let this whole bicameralism, democratic republicanism, and separation of powers get in the way of doing whatever he damn well pleases. Gotta give the man credit where credit is due. He did say he wanted to bring the Change® Not exactly the Change We Believed In back in '08, but he did bring about the Change® Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 The rule of law and the Constitution be damned!!! Full speed ahead with whatever will win PBO votes!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 The rule of law and the Constitution be damned!!! Full speed ahead with whatever will win PBO votes!!! Up to and including disregarding that whole national security and classified information thing if it paints King Obambam as a decisive, tough leader. What could go wrong with that strategy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Up to and including disregarding that whole national security and classified information thing if it paints King Obambam as a decisive, tough leader. What could go wrong with that strategy? Can you imagine the schitstorm if Bush had openly targeted terrorists with drones and released the kind of classified info that this administration has? I haven't heard much about the Patriot Act or Gitmo in the last 3 1/2 years. I started a thread about the MSM not covering the leaks and I get crap here that the Valerie Plame deal was much worse. Certain posters here think it's ok to throw the people that helped us under the bus, but for someone in the State Dept. that disagreed with the Administration's foreign policy, to out someone that wasn't even undercover was worse than getting the good doc who helped us get OBL and the guy who infiltrated Al Qaeda and saved a terrorist attack into deep schit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/17/curl-obama-a-domestic-enemy-of-the-us-constitution/?page=all#pagebreak Obama, not defending the Constitution per his oath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Can you imagine the schitstorm if Bush had openly targeted terrorists with drones and released the kind of classified info that this administration has? I haven't heard much about the Patriot Act or Gitmo in the last 3 1/2 years. I started a thread about the MSM not covering the leaks and I get crap here that the Valerie Plame deal was much worse. Certain posters here think it's ok to throw the people that helped us under the bus, but for someone in the State Dept. that disagreed with the Administration's foreign policy, to out someone that wasn't even undercover was worse than getting the good doc who helped us get OBL and the guy who infiltrated Al Qaeda and saved a terrorist attack into deep schit. Quite the statement, you made there there 3rd. You love to question other people's ability you comprehend what they read, so how about we look at your reading comprehension level. You can start by providing a link to the statements you claim were made in that other thread. The problem with it is; nobody in that other thread said anything even remotely like that. The closest would be me saying I could understand why the "MSM" gave the Plame outing more coverage than they are giving to the current leaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 18, 2012 Author Share Posted June 18, 2012 Quite the statement, you made there there 3rd. You love to question other people's ability you comprehend what they read, so how about we look at your reading comprehension level. You can start by providing a link to the statements you claim were made in that other thread. The problem with it is; nobody in that other thread said anything even remotely like that. The closest would be me saying I could understand why the "MSM" gave the Plame outing more coverage than they are giving to the current leaks. So you still don't understand the difference of a rash of top secret leaks by people obviously high up in the administration that tend to make Obama look tough vs. an inconsequential leak from someone in the State Dept that was opposed to Bush's foreign policy? The MSM has been giving Obama a free pass on this and all you could say was that I was partisan for bringing it up. Don't you think intentionally leaked top secret info that puts our security at risk for purely political reasons is a high crime and worthy of public outrage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Bills Fan Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 You got a set of (internet) stones, I'll give you that. You intentionally misrepresent what I said, then have the (internet) gall to try to throw it back on me when I call you on it. Classic. LOL! I'm still waiting for that link. And I answered that question already. Look it up. Or if you prefer, "Do your own homework, Sue." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Look it up. Or if you prefer, "Do your own homework, Sue." Hey do you have any currency conversion rates or recipes for pasta & pickle juice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts