Check out some similar questions!

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 04:15 AM

Until now the President told Hispanics that he did not have the constitutional authority to implement the decision he announced this week . What changed ? Did he always have the authority and chose not to use it until he could cynically impact the 2012 elections ? Or , does he NOT have the authority ,and this is a cynical if not desperate attempt to hold his 2008 coaltion together ?

It should be clear from the Title of this OP that I think it's the later . He does NOT have such authority .

But what is interesting to me is the way he is trying to hold together the fringes of his coalition. His contraception gambit was an attempt to hold the woman vote. His efforts for the gay vote like chosing to not enforce DOMA ,the suspension of DADT ,his presumably agonizing evolution on his gay marriage position again reeked of desperation . Other moves include his trying to appease both labor and environmentalists on his Keystone Pipeline decision ( approve the construction of the pipeline for a section of the pipeline that is useless unless the rest of the pipeline is approved).

He won because he had the backing of the labor force ;and recent weeks have proven to them that when push comes to shove ;he doesn't have their back.
He did not go to bat for them in the Walker recall election even though he campaigned in neighboring States in the week leading up to the vote.
The AFL-CIO noticed .
AFL-CIO Pulling Funds From Obama Campaign - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

With the erosion of support from key pillars of his coalition ,the President must create a new one... thus his temporary illegal immigrant amnesty decision . Obama's Justice Dept is also suing to stop every attempt at preventing vote fraud around the country, including the removal of known foreign nationals who have voted illegally from the voter rolls.Thus the creation of a new voting block

It is a gambit that could succeed or fail.

2004 ,facing a close recall vote ,Hugo Chavez gave citizenship to 2 million illegals living in Venezuela . That more secured him his Presidency for life . But such a move can also back fire . 2003 ,also facing a recall vote , California Governor Gray Davis issued millions of drivers licenses to illegals in an attempt to win over the Latino vote. That move angered Californians and Davis was recalled .

The question is... is the United States more like California or 3rd world Venezuela ?

There is risk in this gambit for the President. It has been pointed out that this constituency competes with labor for jobs. Perhaps that is why it is a temporary amnesty conveniently times for renewal the next election.cycle. In fact ;all his recent decisions puts stress on the competing interests within his coalition. Gay marriage vs traditional Blacks. Anti-pipeline environmentalists versus blue collar Union workers. Now young illegal aliens vs unemployed youth vote. What will the Occupiers do now that they have been thrown under the bus?

excon · Jun 17, 2012, 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Now young illegal aliens vs unemployed youth vote.

Hello tom:

You're sounding more and more hysterical every day.. But, everything is cool. Obama didn't tell the illegal aliens they could vote.

excon

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 04:57 AM

No he didn't . But you know ,and I know ,that this gambit is a crass ploy to energize a voting block he doesn't care about. You've pointed that out on more than a couple occasions. I'm not hysterical ;but this move by the President is flailing desperation .

paraclete · Jun 17, 2012, 07:09 AM

To be or not to be that is the question, whether it is better to deport or not to deport or is that disport

excon · Jun 17, 2012, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

It should be clear from the Title of this OP that I think it's the later . He does NOT have such authority .

Hello again, tom:

As I pointed out on another thread, Obama is on pace to deport more illegal aliens in his first term, than Bush did during his entire presidency...

So, tell me WHICH president abused the law, and WHICH one didn't?? Why didn't you complain about Bush giving illegals a pass?

excon

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 08:03 AM

Let me go back to the tedious archives of this site and I'll link to the times I did indeed critique the Bush policies about immigration.

excon · Jun 17, 2012, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Let me go back to the tedious archives of this site and I'll link to the times I did indeed critique the Bush policies about immigration.

Hello again, tom:

No need. I believe you. If you want me to say that there's a political contingent to his announcement, I will.

excon

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 08:21 AM

I think it is the ONLY reason for the announcement . The Latinos who are celebrating this should look closely to the President's words ,and believe him when he says "temporary" .

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 11:04 AM

Ex by the way your instincts on the President are correct regarding immigration reform. All one needs to do is study his role in killing the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 to understand how cynical this latest move truly is.

bond1000 · Jun 17, 2012, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Let me go back to the tedious archives of this site and I'll link to the times I did indeed critique the Bush policies about immigration.

Regarding the quote of Tocqueville, I would just point out that it dates to 1856. We have managed so far, and our current dysfunctional government is not more so than at other points in the life of our Rrepublic. Remember the fatricidal fights of our founding fathers; and how about the opposition to the New Deal, the war on poverty, and civil rights. Oh, and let's not forget the Civil War. My points is yes by al means let's find a way to persuade Congress to have an amicable conversation, ut no need to despair; we have gone through a lot worse.

tomder55 · Jun 17, 2012, 01:03 PM

bond1000 ,
Welcome to Current Events . Indeed I have pointed out on numerous occasions that the interamural squabbles at times have been much worse than today. My classic example is that Hamilton lost his life over such disagreements .
Had I been around in the 1930s ,I believe I would've been one of the critics of Roosevelt ;and yet I would've supported him fully in the war effort.
I have no problem with the current ideological divide .I welcome it .I think that group think consensus is damaging to the nation . I think that the disagreements today can clearly be traced all the way back as early as the 2nd Washington Adm . And maybe even earlier

. I think the Toqueville quote is as valid today as it was then . I think the largess that Congress distrubutes to purchase votes is the seed corn of destruction for the nation.

paraclete · Jun 17, 2012, 06:08 PM

Back to the original question

The question is... is the United States more like California or 3rd world Venezuela ?

The US is unlike either of these places since neither have a President for life. Oh happy day says Tom. We can get back to boondoggling our constituents de Tocqueville would like that

speechlesstx · Jun 18, 2012, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Back to the original question

The US is unlike either of these places since neither have a President for life. Oh happy day says Tom. we can get back to boondoggling our constituents de Tocqueville would like that

No, but the tactic was the same.

paraclete · Jun 18, 2012, 07:37 PM

Speech it was ever so, buying the electorate is a political preoccupation, the use of OPM is important to a politician

tomder55 · Jun 19, 2012, 02:52 AM

It's much more than that... It's ignoring laws he's sworn to uphold (Article II, Sec. 3 "... take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." );and inventing laws when it suits his purpose .
Laws are passed by Congress and signed into law by the President . Article 1, Sec. 8 states that "Congress shall have the Power To ... establish ...uniform Rule of Naturalization." 'The Dream Act' was not passed by Congress and yet the President decided he'd implement the provisions .

There is the Chavez comparison. The fact that it is a blatant election year ploy to garner favor with a segment of the electorate just means it is a cynical power grab.

paraclete · Jun 19, 2012, 05:34 AM

Tom this is what you get when you don't elect a mainstream politician

speechlesstx · Jun 19, 2012, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Tom this is what you get when you don't elect a mainstream politician

I didn't elect him, I didn't drink the Koolaid.

excon · Jun 20, 2012, 08:00 PM

Hello:

What Jon Stewart said.

Besides, I think I saw somewhere a righty was complaining about how MSNBC distorts stuff.. To that I say, watch the video carefully.

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

paraclete · Jun 20, 2012, 10:11 PM

Bond no one cares if the conversation is amicable so long as some progress is achieved but as congress is the opposite of progress not much hope of that

excon · Jun 21, 2012, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

It's much more than that ... It's ignoring laws he's sworn to uphold

Hello again, tom:

Let me see.. If Obama has deported MORE illegals in his first term than George W. Bush did in his entire presidency, and NO new immigration law was passed, ONE of 'em wasn't enforcing the law he was sworn to uphold...

I wonder which one it was...

excon