NEWSMAX
Gingrich: Obama Pulled 'Election Year Gimmick' on Immigration
by Paul Scicchitano and Kathleen WalterJune 15, 2012
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich charged President Barack Obama with pulling an “election-year gimmick” in an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV shortly after the administration announced a major shift in its immigration policy.
by Paul Scicchitano and Kathleen WalterJune 15, 2012
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich charged President Barack Obama with pulling an “election-year gimmick” in an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV shortly after the administration announced a major shift in its immigration policy.
“I think it’s very strange,” Gingrich countered after the Department of Homeland Security issued a policy change on Friday that essentially amounts to amnesty for the children of illegal immigrants. “If the president has the power to do that, why didn’t he do it three years ago? And if he can do it for people under 16, can he do it for everybody?”
Under the policy, which took effective immediately, people under 30 who came to the U.S. before they turned 16, will now have a path to remain in the country legally, though still not as citizens.
The change will affect an estimated 800,000 undocumented immigrants, who have lived in the United States for five years, have no criminal record, and have earned a high school diploma, remained in school or served in the military.
“I don’t understand the legal basis of doing it and it makes you wonder, ‘is he just doing this as an election-year gimmick, and if it’s the right policy why did he fail to do it for three-and-a-half years,” Gingrich questioned.
Read more: Gingrich: Obama Pulled ‘Election-Year Gimmick’ on Immigration
by Mark J. Fitzgibbons
June 16, 2012
Read more: http://bit.ly/LUjC3e
NATIONAL REVIEW
Illegal Amnesty
Read more: Gingrich: Obama Pulled ‘Election-Year Gimmick’ on Immigration
AMERICAN THINKER
Obama Lurching Towards Tyrannyby Mark J. Fitzgibbons
June 16, 2012
As reported at The Daily Caller, in one of President Obama's campaign speeches this week he said that "Republicans are 'in favor of a no-holds barred, government is the enemy, market is everything approach.'"
Constitutional conservatives, who decry big government more than establishment Republicans, consider tyranny as the enemy. Government that increasingly violates the Constitution under Republicans or Democrats is, in measure, increasingly tyrannical.
Obama's government is the biggest violator of law in our history. His very methods of governing, which include bypassing Congress's constitutional authority to make law, actually show contempt for the Constitution and the American rule of law.
By executive orders, Mr. Obama both violates the law against his own American-citizen "enemies," such as Catholic institutions when it comes to abortion and birth control, and grants unlawful privileges for his supporters or potential supporters, such as his immigration amnesty order this week.
HHS Secretary Janet Napolitano called the latter not amnesty but "deferred action," and "an exercise of discretion." Yes, that's the same Secretary Napolitano who put veterans and opponents of abortion and illegal immigration on her terrorist watch list in 2009. Yet they wonder why they're increasingly seen as the enemy?
Congress won't pass the DREAM Act? No problem. Who needs the consent of the governed or their elected representatives?
By the scope and consistency of their lawbreaking, the Obama administration is Public Enemy Number 1.
Read more: http://bit.ly/LUjC3e
Illegal Amnesty
by the editors
June 16, 2012
Though apparently a little fuzzy on the subject of judicial review, President Barack Obama is supposed to be a constitutional scholar of some sort. On the subject of his decision yesterday to unilaterally enact sweeping changes to U.S. immigration policy on nothing but his own say-so, we would like to introduce Barack Obama to Barack Obama, who during a Univision interview just last year affirmed: “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. . . . There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.” A little softness in the polls and one executive order later, the president has reversed himself.
The president’s executive order will categorically prevent the deportation of certain illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children. It will also grant them work authorizations to which they would not otherwise be entitled under law. The former is unwise and the latter is illegal.
The federal executive branch, like a local district attorney or a traffic cop, has some discretion about how, when, and whether to prosecute certain violations of the law. Not every driver exceeding the speed limit by 4 mph will receive a ticket, and not every teenager caught shoplifting will face a criminal indictment. Police and prosecutors are granted some leeway in these matters — but they cannot change the speed limit or legalize theft. That requires an act of the legislature. By making the liberal use of this discretion mandatory, the Obama administration is in effect writing new law rather than enforcing existing law.
Well, I didn't write any of these articles, but I understand your frustration. Having said that.. I work in education in TX .. and the guidelines we work under for reporting purposes require that every student be asked if they classify themselves 'Hispanic' or 'Non-Hispanic' .. they choose whether to identify. In practice, however, any student that has lived south of the border (Mexico, South America, Caribbean, etc..) or has ancestors that have lived south of the border.. normally self-identify as Hispanic. (there are exceptions.. though rare). You are right, few Americans have little education about the various cultures that are all incorrectly lumped together under the one term 'Hispanic' here. I will say, only the term 'Hispanic' is used for reporting purposes in Texas Education (not Latino or other nationalities) .. perhaps that is where the problem is? If you would like to contact the Texas Education Agency or State Board of Education, I am sure there are people there who would be be very interested in your concerns. I apologize if this blog offended you.
ReplyDelete