:))
I knew this would happen. Obama overstepped his authority. He even said it multiple times on video that he couldn't do it. No judge will side with him. The next step is the 5th Circuit court. That court is made up of Bush/ Reagan appointees. Once it gets to SCOTUS, they will end it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/judge-andrew-s-hanen-halts-obama-amnesty/
The President also knew this would happen. Its baked in the cake. Illegal enforcement is real easy. You do the best with what resources you have. Judges will determine that there are not enough resources to accomplish the mission. That means 2 things, either Obama can prioritize deportations or the Congress needs to fund for the deportation of 10 million.
Thats the argument going into 2016 over illegals. The GOP refuses to do its job.
For example, 10 cops are working a precinct. There are 15 calls, 10 for felonies in progress and 5 for misdemeanors, who do you dispatch the cops to?
Same with illegals, what do you do? Go after felons or the guy putting up a roof?
Plus there is case law on Obamas side as Reagan and Bush I did the same.
The whole thing is just a mess. Two of my daughters good friends from high school are un-papered. They were brought here with their families when they were less than a year old, and have been here ever since. They know nothing of their home countries and cultures. Both come from families that are very hard working, otherwise law abiding people.
I don't agree with the president on a lot of things, but this is one where I did. Our nation became great because of immigrants. We have lost something since we made the barrier to citizenship so costly. We need to change that.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 17 2015 09:00:48 AM MST
The President also knew this would happen. Its baked in the cake. Illegal enforcement is real easy. You do the best with what resources you have. Judges will determine that there are not enough resources to accomplish the mission. That means 2 things, either Obama can prioritize deportations or the Congress needs to fund for the deportation of 10 million.
Thats the argument going into 2016 over illegals. The GOP refuses to do its job.
For example, 10 cops are working a precinct. There are 15 calls, 10 for felonies in progress and 5 for misdemeanors, who do you dispatch the cops to?
Same with illegals, what do you do? Go after felons or the guy putting up a roof?
Plus there is case law on Obamas side as Reagan and Bush I did the same.
Of course, even while doing illegal acts, Obama is ok. They can be rationalized, rather fully supported, by followers.
Our laws don't
really matter.
Quote from: sqlbullet on February 17 2015 09:13:55 AM MST
We have lost something since we made the barrier to citizenship so costly. We need to change that.
Can you explain what you mean? What is your evidence?
For many years....There have been limits and prohibited people for many many years not allowed to enter the country. We have a process now, it should be used instead of sidestepped....through EOs or EMs.
OK Obama is wrong and is a outlaw, time to impeach him.
Now onto the 12 million illegals, whats the GOP plan to remove them?
They have NO plan as businesses WANT the cheap labor, even wonder why states like Texas do not use E Verify and give illegals FREE college? Of course not, when the REPUBLICANS fail to uphold the law, the GOP voter looks the other way.
And its not only about illegals, the same goes for budgets, gay marriage and foreign policy.
The GOP failed on all counts.
Honestly this is one thing I agree with Australia on, if you illegally enter the country you are ineligible to become a citizen. If you enter legally you are uneligible for welfare but your children are.
They need to cut a deal so that those that entered illegally can be permanent citizens that CANNOT vote.
The kids if they serve in the military or get a 4 year degree should be made citizens that can vote.
While we get rid of the criminals.
Is that so tough?
Quote from: Wolfie on February 17 2015 12:10:29 PM MST
They need to cut a deal so that those that entered illegally can be permanent citizens that CANNOT vote.
The kids if they serve in the military or get a 4 year degree should be made citizens that can vote.
While we get rid of the criminals.
Is that so tough?
The crux of the matter is right there in bold.......
making a deal. When there are two opposing views and each want their own way....it's hard to compromise to make a deal. Both parties want them in the US.....after that.....it becomes a stalemate. The Dems won't give up on allowing them to vote and collect benefits.
Baron, we know what the Democrats want, what do the Republicans want?
Quote from: Wolfie on February 17 2015 12:29:29 PM MST
Baron, we know what the Democrats want, what do the Republicans want?
They want them hear to work.
I have spoken to State and Federal reps about this.....it is hard to get past that.....they don't want them to gain voting rights and full access to benefits immediately....hence, with that, they are more likely to vote en masse for Dems. Which gets back to the compromise issue.
Which is where the republicans are being stupid.
Here we have a huge group of folks, mostly Catholic, with very conservative values. Basically cookie cutter made for the republican base, except they aren't white. So the republicans of course work really hard at alienating them.
Quote from: sqlbullet on February 17 2015 02:45:12 PM MST
Which is where the republicans are being stupid.
Here we have a huge group of folks, mostly Catholic, with very conservative values. Basically cookie cutter made for the republican base, except they aren't white. So the republicans of course work really hard at alienating them.
Actually, they trend to vote Democratic, even with the attributes you listed above.....hence, the problem for the Repubs and subsequent conservative base. If this trend wasn't there, they would gladly make them model US citizens in a heart beat.
sqlbullet, spot on.
Every race at one time were Democrats. The Irish in NY were treated WORSE than blacks, Germans were discriminated against. The GOP passed laws in the 1920's keeping Italians and Jews out.
The GOP has no margin or error in the future, every southern state has a student body were whites are a minority.
These groups will perceive the GOP as wanting their labor while considering them second class citizens. I do not see how their children will warm to the GOP.
btw: In the northeast, lots of illegals, but there is a huge block of them from Europe. People who visit and overstay their Visas.
Well......why didn't the Dems get something passed when they had control of the House/Senate and White House? For a while they had a veto proof majority. Why didn't they get something done? Cause there are many Dems that struggle with what the liberal arm of the Dem party wanted to do.
It's not as easy as one makes it out to believe. States still have a limited say so....albeit smaller with this King.
Why?
800,000 job losses a month, 9% contraction and the US losing $20 trillion of wealth was one priority.
2 open wars were another.
Capturing the 911 mastermind was another.
And the ACA were all more important.
Lets look forward to 2016
Here's a tweet from Jorge Ramos, a very influential Latino journalist at Univision:
The Texas decision clearly defines who is against immigrants in the U.S. Latino voters will remember; 2016 is not that far away.
— @jorgeramosnews He is the Hispanic equivalent to el Rushbo
More
Latino Decisions found that fully 89 percent of Latino voters supported the measures. The poll also tested how helpful supporting the policies would be for the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. It found that 85 percent of Latino voters were likely to vote for Clinton if she committed to renewing Obama's policies in 2017, and that support extended across party lines among Latino voters.
Of the 85 percent who said they would likely vote for Clinton if she renewed the measures, 73 percent were independent voters. Even a majority of Republican voters—56 percent—said Clinton's support for executive action was likely to get their vote.
Clinton, by the way, has announced her support for the policies, calling them "an historic step."
In the wake of today's ruling, America's Voice executive director Frank Sharry noted the political turning point for Republicans, who are now seeking to undo Obama's incredibly popular actions both in the states and in Congress.
"For many years, Americans and public officials across the country have taken steps on their own to integrate and accommodate immigrants who are part of the community. They did so because our politicians in Washington refused to act. Now many of these same politicians in 26 states have decided to undo the very work of their own communities. And there will be a terrible price to pay for their crass political maneuvering."
Bush barely won 2 elections with 40% of the vote.
Obama won 2 blowouts with 70%
When Hillary takes 80% with 20% of the GOP women vote, get ready to say Madam President.
Maybe the decision is based on law and not a dislike for immigrants?
What law?
Congress refusing to fund the deportation of 12 million?
They fund for less than 500K, Obama makes that mark.
What he is doing is prioritizing and identifying who is here.
Let me ask you, you have 5 border cops and a call for 25 illegals in the area and you know who they are. Do you go after the 5 felons or the ones picking fruit?
If you do not like what Obama is doing, what is the alternative?
I don't know what the problem was with our immigration law. Obama keeps saying it's broken. It hasn't been being enforced.
It has not been enforced since Ike.
After 911 the borders were left wide open.
Obama gets in and all of the sudden its a problem, like deficits no one cared under Bush but all of the sudden they cared now.
Little segway to Gay Marriage, why are conservatives not protesting the court that is about to affirm gay marriage as the law of the land? Why? Its a GOP court and while the GOP is in charge there is no rage by the conservative BS voter.
They only engage when a Democrat is in charge of something.
It's about damn time someone stood up to this unlawful, POS bully. Worst thing that has happened to America (besides TV dinners ::)).
How has this demon stayed in office this long?
Pat
I just want to say...
In the most adult and professional way I can...
Ha, Ha, Ha...
Nyeah, Nyeah, Nyeah...
Phhttt!
Once again....King Obama is praised for his almightiness..........because he blames Bush for everything. LOL!!
Immigration is a political issue........it's handled by politicians......it'll be spun by whomever is in office....or who has the best spunner.
By the way Wolfie, it happens to every president; Clinton blamed everything he did wrong or happened to on Bush (43)....he did it after he left office. LOL!! Plus he blamed the prior Bush. It's the Dems SOP....blame the past.
When does King Obama take responsibility for something? Obamacare? Nope, he'll blame it on the repubs in congress for not passing his plan...instead they passed the Dems plan.
Let see.......King Obama has been in office for 6 years and his cronies still blame Bush? It's old, but the koolaid drinkers will not get tired of it.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 17 2015 04:43:53 PM MST
It has not been enforced since Ike.
After 911 the borders were left wide open.
Ok-
A big problem we have is voters blaming things on previous presidents, to support their guy, and allowing politicians to not take responsibility. If I apply/interview and am hired for a job I take ownership of the situation. Things could be turned around.
Border guards have been told not to make arrests. Now they are being told to let drunk drivers go.
For the sake of the republic, be a little more critical of elected officials. Even if it's your guy.
I am neither a democrat or republican apologist.
OK
I support mass deportation and the funding to do it. Not providing the tools to the Executive places the blame on Congress.
I also support GOP run border states to start using E Verify and wonder why they do not use it.
I also wonder why Texas gives free college to illegals instead of real Americans.
Obama is not going to require/enforce existing law and mass deportation
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 09:31:25 AM MST
OK
I support mass deportation and the funding to do it. Not providing the tools to the Executive places the blame on Congress.
I also support GOP run border states to start using E Verify and wonder why they do not use it.
I also wonder why Texas gives free college to illegals instead of real Americans.
Texas does not give free tuition to illegals. They offer the Texas resident tuition cost instead of the out of state cost, as long as the student signs a paper saying they are in the process of becoming a citizen and they prove they have lived in Texas for 3 years.
Are those residents illegals?
It doesn't matter if Obama has the right idea, or his heart is in the right place or if you agree with him.
What matters is that it's up to congress to do these things. A president cannot make his own laws. A president cannot violate a written law and give work permits to people who are prohibited by law to obtain one. Obama has also rented an office building and hired 1,000 workers to handle the paperwork for these permits, illegally transering funds from the DHS budget without congressional approval.
And to top that, Obama said today that he will defy the judges order and continue making preparations to put his amnesty plan in place.
The man has no respect for the American constitution. No respect for the law. No respect for the judicial system that has ordered him to stop.
That should scare all Americans.
The Presidents job is to protect the Constitution, if Congress fails at protecting it, its the Executives job.
Its in his oath of office.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 10:08:19 AM MST
The Presidents job is to protect the Constitution, if Congress fails at protecting it, its the Executives job.
Its in his oath of office.
Uphold, protect, and
abide by....
He tramples it
and openly admits it.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 10:08:19 AM MST
The Presidents job is to protect the Constitution, if Congress fails at protecting it, its the Executives job.
Its in his oath of office.
Negative Ghostrider!
You've drunk way tooo much koolaid if you believe what you've just stated.
Whats the negative?
Thats how it works.
We are being invaded, Congress is not acting and the president it.
I am 100% for this lawsuit, if the GOP wins, it will be de facto amnesty anyway.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 03:00:45 PM MST
Whats the negative?
Thats how it works.
We are being invaded, Congress is not acting and the president it.
I am 100% for this lawsuit, if the GOP wins, it will be de facto amnesty anyway.
Rich10 answered if for me.
The presidential oath........"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
It's not one or the other...it's all of the above.....'preserve, protect and defend'. Executive Orders and/or Executive Memos are one piece of a presidents' powers; however, a president can issue a EO/EM that could be against the Constitution/Law.
What about this lawsuit are you 100% for? Possibly giving the Repubs a black eye? What do you mean by 'de facto amnesty'? Not sure I understand that.
Wolfie;
AGREED: We ARE being invaded and the president IS doing something about it - HELPING THE INVADERS!!
My tactical trainer was with the U.S. Border Patrol for many years - got out after our Islamic president's first term in his regime. The stories I have heard are truly incredible. Swears they are true.
Ask your border patrol friend why the GOP did not lock down the borders after 911.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 06:22:35 PM MST
Ask your border patrol friend why the GOP did not lock down the borders after 911.
I still haven't figured out what you mean by the border being open after 9/11.
Example- http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/mexico-border-closings-deportation-juarez-drug
_________________________________________________________________________________________
On the flip side, Obama has been telling agencies to ignore federal law. He has hurt national security in more ways than any other president.
The borders are more secure under Obama than Bush.
No one complained when Bush did nothing.
The complainers, those that live in GOP states have no problem with their governments not requiring E Verify.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 07:29:01 PM MST
The borders are more secure under Obama than Bush
Ok :-\
How many tens of thousands has he let walk through in the last year?
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 07:29:01 PM MST
No one complained when Bush did nothing.
You ignore facts as shown.
______________________________________________________________
You're delusional.
I know, numbers just lie.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 08:05:53 PM MST
I know, numbers just lie.
Numbers? Like deportation numbers? That's different from saying secure border, but, ok- http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117412/deportations-under-obama-vs-bush-who-deported-more-immigrants
Quote from: Rich10 on February 18 2015 07:39:42 PM MST
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 07:29:01 PM MST
The borders are more secure under Obama than Bush
Ok :-\
How many tens of thousands has he let walk through in the last year? He literally invited illegals in.
The left is increasingly angry with President Obama, calling him the "deporter-in-chief." That's because the total number of deportations during Obama's tenure recently passed 2 million. As Dara Lind wrote last week at Vox, that pace puts him on track to "have deported more people by the end of 2014 than George W. Bush did in his entire eight years."
Keep reading.
Obama, like Hilary, can only complain about the past and have no actions of their own to point to.
Buckeye, I am no fan of the Democrats either.
But look at the issue, we have a immigration problem and the GOP has no alternative. So Obama acts and he continues to increase deportations by going after more criminals 105,000 deported in 2008, 198,000 in 2013. Congress funds for less than 500,000 deportations a year.
Unless Congress funds for the deportation of 12 million, Obama will be right to act. And what he doing is just simple prioritization. There are military and OTJ guys here, you know what I mean. Who do you go after 1st? And what's wrong with getting the rest on the "record?"
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/
Quote from: Wolfie on February 18 2015 10:44:33 PM MST
Buckeye, I am no fan of the Democrats either.
But look at the issue, we have a immigration problem and the GOP has no alternative. So Obama acts and he continues to increase deportations by going after more criminals 105,000 deported in 2008, 198,000 in 2013. Congress funds for less than 500,000 deportations a year.
Unless Congress funds for the deportation of 12 million, Obama will be right to act. And what he doing is just simple prioritization. There are military and OTJ guys here, you know what I mean. Who do you go after 1st? And what's wrong with getting the rest on the "record?"
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-deportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/
Obama creates crisis, Obama demands action, Obama takes action on his own. Obama acting illegally.
Also, try reading the whole article- http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117412/deportations-under-obama-vs-bush-who-deported-more-immigrants
Yes, Obama has been the only president since Ike.
Many moons ago when I was in college I said illegal immigration would be the downfall of this country if unchecked - circa 1976.
WOLFIE: I did ask my instructor and apparently you would not like his answer - his answer: "Not good under any of the presidents, but it took a vicious and clearly obvious turn for the worse since the Obama regime took over." Eric Holder is Obama's Joseph Goebbels and he has been directing policy and practices (for the Border Patrol - AND others), which have deliberately made it easy for Mexican drug lords and associated illegals.
This should have been "fixed" 50 years ago. It is no secret that Barack Hussein (first Muslim president) is opening the floodgates to register more "new" democratic voters.
For the life of me, the REAL question I have is: "Where is all of the American outrage against this idiot president?" He will continue until checked.
On another issue, by pandering to Islam and not allowing the word "terrorists" to be used in reference to, uh, hm, TERRORISTS!, I think he is committing treason by aiding and abetting an enemy.. The asshole even said the problem with terrorists is they were poor and needed assistance - are you fu*$%ng kidding me??? :o :o :o :o ???
What is the penalty for that? Hanging, life in prison
In addition to the drool emoticon, increasingly we need a popcorn emoticon. At least I do.
Quote from: sqlbullet on February 19 2015 03:58:12 PM MST
In addition to the drool emoticon, increasingly we need a popcorn emoticon. At least I do.
Seconded ;)
Of course Buckeye, its all gotten worse since Obama got in.
Let me guess you started to pay attention to politics and immigration on January of 2009.
Now you accuse the president of treason, based on what? Letting 911 happen, invading Iraq that had nothing to do with 911 while killing 4600 troops and wasting 4 trillion.
Let me see, Obama is also responsible for the 2008 crash and gay marriage.
As for pandering to Islam, I have a long list of pandering that Bush did, but since he is white and GOP you had no problem with it.
Wolfie;
Things HAVE gotten much worse under our Muslim leader. However, no one has had any real brass since Harry Truman so the list of cowards unwilling to do the right thing for this great country at the expense of their own careers is a long one.
Obama had NOTHING to do with the crash, but his handling of it was near criminal (spend our way out of debt??). His regime is artificially pumping up the economy to make him look good. When the Fed bond-buying and money printing and interest rate suppression is lifted we WILL hit a wall that will make 2008/2009 look like a head cold.
As far as race: I suspect many, many people are hoping they will blame his problems on the fact he is black. Not me. I say he is a fucking idiot only because he IS a fucking idiot irregardless of whether he is blue, orange or whatever. Blaming it on race won't cut this - too convenient of an excuse.
Actually, when he was elected part of me kind of liked what he said during his campaign and acceptance speech. I thought we may have finally come a long way to have a black man as president. The part I hate is they turned out to be all lies that he blames on everyone else.
I didn't think George Bush was an effective leader either. Just for the record, the presidents I have admired the most have been Truman, JFK and Ronald Reagan. All had their faults but these guys were true LEADERS, I think with America's best interests at heart.
Maybe we should just stick to guns because nothing I feel or say will change anything?
Sorry Buckeye things have gotten better for me.
I have better healthcare.
My stocks have done very well.
I can now afford to buy whatever I want, including 5 10 mms this last year.
My property (Multiple) values are almost back to 2007 levels.
BUT, if Obama is not doing good enough, what is the GOP alternative for anything? If there is a better plan, let me know, I am willing to listen.
Well, there is Obamacare taxes.....which most won't feel it's bite until next year or maybe 2017...by design of course.
How much has Obama spent? How much more indebtedness have we gone encountered? Of course, the natural Dem response is Bush spent a bunch more......once again, trying to blame Bush.
The regulatory issues he has signed have placed a burden on many companies. Some analysts have estimated that by the time all of the regs are implemented, it will cost the companies 3-7% of gross sales to maintain....which is ultimately passed onto the consumer either higher prices and/or elimination of people to fund the extra burdens.
The good times you have enjoyed are not a result of anything Obama has done, they are the result of a natural economy. There have been lots of speculation that if he would have not spent as much, stayed out of the regulatory issues and housing market, the economy would have excelled quicker.
Should we even address the job market.......unemployed/underemployed.
King Obama is not, and will not be considered a leader....at best a community organizer/meddler. Who knows, with the ISIS(L) deal, Jimmy Carter my surpass him on the presidential ranking.
Wow Baron Obama spent more?
Based on what?
Here are the facts, 2009 deficit was 1.8 Trillion its now around 600 billion a year, making Obama the biggest deficit cutter ever.
Debt, what did Obama add? 1 trillion on the Stimulus thats it, the rest is due to the GOP recession and putting the wars on the books.
Obama has been a very good president, you guys talk as if he took over at a time of peace and a good economy, but he took over 800,000 job losses a month, 9% contraction, 2 open wars and bin Laden on the lose.
He tunred all of that around with NO Republican help at all.
I will leave with 2 points for you to ponder.
1. Whats the GOP plan for anything.
2. Will the SEAL Team 6 signed mission flag in the OBL raid be a centerpiece of the Obama library or will it have its own wing? Because as we all know, you have to go back to Teddy Roosevelt to find a president that has one of those.
Just wait till he hands it off to Hillary.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 20 2015 10:00:05 AM MST
Wow Baron Obama spent more?
Based on what?
Here are the facts, 2009 deficit was 1.8 Trillion its now around 600 billion a year, making Obama the biggest deficit cutter ever. Debt, not deficit. Learn the difference.
Debt, what did Obama add? 1 trillion on the Stimulus thats it, the rest is due to the GOP recession and putting the wars on the books. Again, review what debt is. National Debt is estimated to be 18 trillion....when King Obama came to power, it was around 10 trillion.
Obama has been a very good president (in what way, socializing the American economy), you guys talk as if he took over at a time of peace and a good economy, but he took over 800,000 job losses a month, 9% contraction, 2 open wars and bin Laden on the lose. The underemployed and the true unemployed numbers tell a different story.
He tunred all of that around with NO Republican help at all. What did he do to turn it around?
I will leave with 2 points for you to ponder.
1. Whats the GOP plan for anything. Don't have a specific one, they weren't in charge...but the lip service was less gubbermit interference, less taxes and no national health care mandate.
2. Will the SEAL Team 6 signed mission flag in the OBL raid be a centerpiece of the Obama library or will it have its own wing? Because as we all know, you have to go back to Teddy Roosevelt to find a president that has one of those.
Just wait till he hands it off to Hillary. Another sad time.....more blaming the US for the worlds problem. I wonder if she will use the terrorist in the same sentence with Islamic?
I've responded in red. You have drank from the koolaid. ;D
Facts
Debt is accumulated, deficits are yearly.
18 trillion is the current debt. Please list the 8 trillion Obama added, I have him on the hook for the 1 trillion Stimulus, can you tell me what the other 7 trillion was spent on? Its putting the wars on the book and the blowback from the GOP Great Recession.
Socialism? You jest, Obama did one socialist program the ACA which is actually the GOP counter to Hillarycare in 1994. Bush and the GOP created the following socialist programs:
No Child Left Behind
Nation Building
Patriot Act
Prescription Drugs
Medicare Plus
YES the GOP is the true socialist party.
Now that the GOP ran and won, what is their plan for anything? They have NO plan.
The ACA made by plan much better, I can never go bankrupt and if you had resources you would understand how good that is. It freed up a lot of capital that I saved for emergencies. That allowed me to buy another Muscle Car a bike and a bunch of handguns among other things.
Obama is 100% correct in not attaching Islam to Terrorism, you guys want to legitimize them, but what am I talking about, Cowboy GOP style diplomacy is the way to go. Never mind war for 10 years and the same troops going in and out are being hammered, as long as we talk tough and send someone elses kid to die while their kids make money on the war, all is well.
Teddy Roosevelt the last great GOP president had a saying, talk softly and carry a big stick.
Thats exactly how Obama operates, you can yearn for GOP nonsense but I am no fool.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 20 2015 01:44:32 PM MST
Facts
Debt is accumulated, deficits are yearly.
18 trillion is the current debt. Please list the 8 trillion Obama added, I have him on the hook for the 1 trillion Stimulus, can you tell me what the other 7 trillion was spent on? It putting the wars on the book and the blowback from the GOP Great Recession.
Socialism? You jest, Obama did one socialist program the ACA which is actually the GOP counter to Hillarycare in 1994. Bush and the GOP created the following socialist programs:
No Child Left Behind
Nation Building
Patriot Act
Prescription Drugs
Medicare Plus
YES the GOP is the true socialist party.
Now that the GOP ran and won, what is their plan for anything? They have NO plan.
The AVA made by plan much better, I can never go bankrupt and if you had resources you would understand how good that is. It freed up a lot of capital that I saved for emergencies. That allowed me to buy another Muscle Car a bike and a bunch of handguns among other things.
Obama is 100% correct in not attaching Islam to Terrorism, you guys want to legitimize them, but what am I talking about, Cowboy GOP style diplomacy is the way to go. Never mind war for 10 years and the same troops going in and out are being hammered, as long as we talk tough and send someone elses kid to die while their kids make money on the war, all is well.
Teddy Roosevelt the last great GOP president had a saying, talk softly and carry a big stick.
Thats exactly how Obama operates, you can yearn for GOP nonsense but I am no fool.
Wolfie.....lay off the koolaid. It'll help your blood pressure.
As for the debt...you ask him, I have no idea and I doubt most everyone else doesn't know either.......stats show when he took office with 10 trillion; now it is up 18 trillion.
WOW....are you sure you understand socialist? what you've stated and what they are don't match. Have repubs introduced things, yep.....and you are taking the actions of 3 R presidents (20 year span with a Dem that helped too) to come up with that list of social programs. Some were already in place, just expanded upon. There are several I wish we could do without.....but when has the gubbermit revoked a social program? right Never!
Again....blaming Bush is the standard for dems.....it's all because of Bush....it all because what Bush did....yada yada yada! It's it so comical now....No Dems takes responsibility....but it's Bush's fault! LOL!!!
The GOP has sent a balanced budget to King Obama...hmmmmm...so far he hasn't signed it. You know what a balanced budget is, right...one that doesn't run any deficits, which in turn don't add to the national debt. 8)
You need to look at Obama's EOs and EMs to see his 'other' programs. Interestingly, this amnesty bill is one.
What do the Dems have on the plate to reduce the deficits? Debt? the massive overreach of Obamacare (which you will dislike in a year or so)? What are their plans for boosting employment and reducing underemployment? Spend more money.....trust them to govern everything from Washington?
The Dems have had the House/Senate & WH to really lead this country...what have we gotten....huge loss of the middle class, overly burden regulations, more taxes (my taxes are up $1,800 over last year with the same deductions and approx income), the highest underemployment ever, an economy that is slushing along....yep....the Dems have done a lot for this country!
Later Wolfie......enjoy the koolaid.
I thought I was done with this thread but I just have a few more thoughts ::)
Actually, I have grown sick of these "current" republicans. They seem mostly anymore to be spineless lemmings that are more about being seen as cooperative and less trouble. Of the current options to me, the best for ME personally seems to be the values of the Tea Party - clearly conservative and cleanly positioned in the "marketplace" of voters but no national organization. This probably means little chances in any election, especially with both Democrats and Republican fearing/hating them (may be the part I like best..... :o
He did inherit an economic mess - made by Bill Clinton in the 90's (AND ignored by Bush) relative to housing. However, until the liberal media turns on Muslim U.S. President Barach Hussein, NOTHING is going to happen to him. That means he finishes his regime (unless he goes for a third term - wow: Belize here I come!)
The better question for many of us here is, "Who will be the best, most electable conservative candidate?"
Pat
Baron, you cannot tell how Obama spent $8 trillion?
Easy peasy he put all the crap the GOP left OFF the books ON the books.
This is what GOP Senator Orin Hatch said about the Bush years. "It was common not to pay for things under Bush." Where was the Baron when all that was going on?
BUSH is the STANDARD that you judge Obama on, thats how it works.
Americas middle class lost $20 trillion in wealth due to the GOP Great Recession, the Democrat plan is to raise the minimum wage. We still have no GOP plan for anything.
Don't worry be happy and get Ready for Hillary.
I attended 3 Tea Parties Buckeye, it was a GOP operation.
In 2014 the Establishment crushed the Tea Party.
The Tea Party made a fatal error siding with the GOP, they should have brought in the Blue Dog Conservative Democrats, instead they slaughtered them.
Now the Tea Party has no moves, they are cooked.
Just think, a TP with a nice passel of Democrats would be running Congress right now. But they were used to put Boehner and McConnell, the same exact guys that let Bush run wild back in power.
What did you expect was going to happen?
Hillary would be older than Ronny if she runs. I don't think she will. It will be a bait and switch. She is just to poor at campaigning to make it past the finish line. Its all machine politics on the D side of the balance, and what the machine wants, the machine gets.
I'd love to see what would happen if Webb runs against Hillary and have the Party stand down and let the people choose. It won't happen!
As far as the party as a whole.......
Read the communist manifesto and tell me which party platform it resembles.
Greg
Quote from: 10mmfan on February 17 2015 12:06:20 PM MST
Honestly this is one thing I agree with Australia on, if you illegally enter the country you are ineligible to become a citizen. If you enter legally you are uneligible for welfare but your children are.
Sorry, I have no pity for the children of illegals. Their parents brought them in illegally or had them while here illegally. They should not take food/ medical benefits from the mouths of children of legally citizens. There are only so much welfare dollars allocated. We give huge chunks to illegals, there's less for our own people., and everybody suffers. Unless you like higher taxes to pay more welfare recipients.
The age comparisons between Hillary Clinton and Ronald Reagan seem as natural as they are nonsensical.
Yes, were Clinton to win in 2016, she would take office at age 69—just as Reagan did in 1981. And yes, the comparison is often made when Clinton's critics and allies debate whether she has the health to serve out two presidential terms.
But it's a wildly misleading comparison, as the number that matters when assessing Clinton's health is not her age, but her life expectancy. And there is where the Clinton-Reagan comparison is revealed as a stretch.
A combination of federal data and a more nuanced approach to calculating Clinton's life expectancy—one that includes her gender, era, and other factors—projects the would-be president living to age 86. That means Clinton would live a full 17 years after taking office, more than enough time to serve out two terms.
Under the same criteria used to calculate Clinton's life expectancy, Reagan upon inauguration was projected to live to 81—12 projected years after taking the oath to Clinton's 17.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house/why-you-can-t-compare-hillary-clinton-s-age-to-ronald-reagan-s-20140423
She wins comfortably, the Ds take the Senate and make inroads to the House.
Webb wins by LARGER margins and also takes the House.
Quote from: gandog56 on February 22 2015 06:36:26 AM MST
Sorry, I have no pity for the children of illegals. Their parents brought them in illegally or had them while here illegally. They should not take food/ medical benefits from the mouths of children of legally citizens. There are only so much welfare dollars allocated. We give huge chunks to illegals, there's less for our own people., and everybody suffers. Unless you like higher taxes to pay more welfare recipients.
Originally only children of U.S. citizens could become citizens. If you were in the U.S. for ANY reason, and you had a child here, he/she wouldn't be a US citizen. Native Americans (Indians) were not considered citizens even though they were born here, and neither were their children. I do not know whether black slaves (or any color slaves) were considered citizens.
.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 22 2015 11:32:31 AM MST
She wins comfortably, the Ds take the Senate and make inroads to the House.
Webb wins by LARGER margins and also takes the House.
Its been awhile since I have seen someone so pro-dem, anti republican.
I can't help to think your part of the machine. Labor Union, Teacher's Union, Gov Employee, .... What part of the bought and paid for do you belong?
When you stop thinking for yourself and holding the establishment to account, the freedom is removed and your dependance is complete.
Greg
I would consider myself more in the anti-Republican than pro-Democrat camp.
Trying to insult me by saying I do not think for myself is cute.
I deal with facts, when Democrats say something, whether you like it or not they deliver. When Republicans make promises they fail to deliver. But as a FOX News viewer, Republican failure is never covered.
Just in the last 10 years, Republicans have failed at foreign policy, economics and family values.
Why do you support them when all they do is fail you?
Oh wait, FOX tells you how to vote, never mind.
Oh boy Hillary in the White House. I get to pay more towards funding the Welfare State, I would get another Socialist in power, I get another gun grabber in there (hey remember when Billy boy tried to slip in a rule that if you were on welfare you could have your home searched anytime they wanted). Yeah great let's just put another one of Saul Alinsky's devotees in power. I really loved her handling of Benghazi just as I'm sure the families of those who were there did (especially if they were a member of the group that attacked us). I'd rather elect a Chia Pet than Hillary. The Democrats were shown the door in the mid-terms. They are running away from supporting Obama. The problem they all have is they don't know what they want to be or what they want to believe or what they want to take credit for. The democratic redistribution of wealth policies are tired and sorely out of date. Just great...let me start wearing brown and goose stepping everywhere now.
I'm tired of Obama in particular using the Constitution to wipe his rear end. I'm glad a Federal judge stood up and slapped him for exceeding his authority.
Socialists like Bush P33v3?
Hillary is going to crush her opponent. When less than 40% vote like in 2010 and 2014 Republicans win. When over 60% vote in presidentials like 2008 and 2012 Democrats win.
You have to hope people do not come out to vote to win, I will bet Hillary will get over 60% to vote.
As for Benghazi what would you have done? Risk American lives for those already KIA?
All, just for the record, most economists "credited" the 2008/2009 crash to the realty/housing mortgage market imploding. Fact is, back in the mid 90's, Clinton and the feds pushed all lenders into making, "more homes available to more people" by forcing most banks to lower their qualifying standards for mortgage loans. Bush did NO ONE favors (economically) while he was in either. He had nearly eight years to re-direct the train headed for Bottomsville and did nothing.
How idyllic: everyone has their own home and lives happily ever after..........until the people who could pay loans before (and were denied because of that) couldn't pay their loans then either. So much default happened it became a black hole and sucked most of the financial market into the abyss with it.
Many medium and smaller lenders folded and the market took a bath.
THAT is what caused the last crash.
Wolfie:
I have come to detest most Republicans today too mainly because they are not taking a strong and clear stand for fundamental conservative values. Their spineless compromising is sickening. For me, the real problem is that I see few alternatives to uncontrolled liberalism since the only opposing party is more concerned with covering their ass and being seen as "cooperative."
I think what most are concerned about is NOW, socialism if not some form of communism seems like the next stop for the train at the rate we are going......
Pat
Actually, the REAL problem (in my humble opinion) is NOW the "fix" will be so bad that if done, it for sure will be political suicide.
Just look at Greece - they are almost totally out of control and even minor attempts to slow the hemorrhaging has been met with riots for people not wanting to give up their subsidies (which they haven't been able to afford since WWII).
Don't know where this leaves us?
Oh wait, yes I do: Earth, Hitler, 1930. Consolidate power because only absolute power will be strong enough to really "fix" such a broad and deep problem.
So, do any conservative politicians have the guts to do the right thing?
Pat
Democrats passed Housing Laws to rebuild old areas like the South Bronx. The GOP took it further to build new developments.
This is what Bush did for homeownership. Add this with no SEC enforcement with derivative trading and you have disaster. Lets not even talk about how builders were a major Bush campaign contributors.
Expanding Home Ownership
"This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."
- President George W. Bush, December 16, 2003
The Accomplishments
Increasing Homeownership
The US homeownership rate reached a record 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004. The number of homeowners in the United States reached 73.4 million, the most ever. And for the first time, the majority of minority Americans own their own homes.
The President set a goal to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Through his homeownership challenge, the President called on the private sector to help in this effort. More than two dozen companies and organizations have made commitments to increase minority homeownership - including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
President Bush signed the $200 million-per-year American Dream Downpayment Act which will help approximately 40,000 families each year with their downpayment and closing costs.
The Administration proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for first-time homebuyers without a downpayment. Projections indicate this could generate over 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
President Bush proposed a new Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit to increase the supply of affordable homes.
The President has proposed to more than double funding for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), where government and non-profit organizations work closely together to increase homeownership opportunities.
The President proposed $2.7 billion in USDA home loan guarantees to support rural homeownership and $1.1 billion in direct loans for low-income borrowers unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/achievement/chap7.html
As for Greece, they were also brought down by their version of Republicans.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 22 2015 12:06:35 PM MST
I would consider myself more in the anti-Republican than pro-Democrat camp.
Trying to insult me by saying I do not think for myself is cute.
I deal with facts, when Democrats say something, whether you like it or not they deliver. When Republicans make promises they fail to deliver. But as a FOX News viewer, Republican failure is never covered.
Just in the last 10 years, Republicans have failed at foreign policy, economics and family values.
Why do you support them when all they do is fail you?
Oh wait, FOX tells you how to vote, never mind.
I watch some FOX. I watch some CNN. I cannot stomach MSNBC.
I fall into the anti-politician form. The offices were designed to be filled by everyday men as a service to the country. They have become a life long profession designed to fill pockets, both for the office holder and their corrupt contributors. An amendment to the Constitution limiting the time to 12 years TOTAL in office in DC would be a big step forward IMHO.
What is really cute is your talking points. If you actually believe them, I renew the thinking for yourself thing.
Did Saul Alinsky tell you not to answer the following?
What party platform resembles the Communist Manifesto?
And
Labor Union, Teacher's Union, Gov Employee, .... What part of the bought and paid for do you belong?
Greg
My talking points will be delivering for the voters.
The only show I watch on MSNBC is O Donnell late at night, he is into strategy. I watch FOX and CNN, I like Shepard Smith.
Lets review my views on the issues going on today.
I am for mass deportation and the funding to do it. Short of that I side with Obama.
I am for a raise in the minimum wage.
I am for national reciprocity for gun licenses if it includes background checks.
I am for Congress authorizing force to go after ISIL.
As for the Communist Manifesto, all I know is that the GOP opened up that line of credit with the ChiComs and that the ChiComs got the oil contracts after we wasted $4 trillion and buried 4500 troopers.
So you tell me which party is more commie based on performance.
Quote from: Wolfie on February 22 2015 01:11:44 PM MST
Socialists like Bush P33v3?
Hillary is going to crush her opponent. When less than 40% vote like in 2010 and 2014 Republicans win. When over 60% vote in presidentials like 2008 and 2012 Democrats win.
You have to hope people do not come out to vote to win, I will bet Hillary will get over 60% to vote.
As for Benghazi what would you have done? Risk American lives for those already KIA?
No, Socialists like the Clintons and Obama.
Hilly's support is already wavering. She, Billy and miserable old Harry Reid can all go take Nancy Pelosi, the criminal Eric Holder and go have a Coke and a smile with Dianne Feinstein. Hilly can try an distance herself from Obama but she was one of his cronies and a serious failure of intelligence happened on her watch. She knew about it and could have prevented it had it not unconvinced her too much.
As for voting, I hope 60% DO show up. In fact I hope 100% show up including the more moderates who are footing the bill for Obama's social programs like Obamacare that they are footing the bill for leading to the Welfare state that Socialist like Obama and Hill-a-beans Clinton love.
As for Benghazi, it looks like she knew about it. As for what to do the only way to deal with people who make war on you is to bring war to your enemy such as they have never seen and will remember for generations.
Hilly is a Socialist. Her mentor Saul Alinsky was a (as he called himself) radical who strongly believed. He felt that it was the best way to improve the disparity between the "haves," as he called the middle class and wealthy, and the "have-nots," referring to the poor. So if YOU want to give more of your hard earned money away, feel free. I do not. Don't even get me started on Obama.
Look this is a discussion board for 10mm firearms not socialist politician like Hilly and Obummy. I for one am moving on to another topic.
But back to the ORIGINAL topic of this post:
I am VERY happy that our CIC got slapped down by the courts for overstepping his authority. It should have happened a long time ago.
For me:
I am for legal immigration. Its like so many other things that congress won't handle for fear they will be tossed from office. To me, Immigration/assimilation is a strength of the country, and it would make all the sense in the world to allow immigration on our terms. How about 10 years after they are allowed in, understand basic English, no arrest record, and then you are a fellow countryman. Truth be told, a lot of those coming in are better Americans than some that were born here. Problem is that they NEED a legal path in, and in reality it just isn't available.
I am NOT for raising the minimum wage. How much is a school kid worth on his/her first job? How much is a handicapped person worth when his/her productivity will never match an average level? I'm all for getting folks employed and feeling the pride of a job well done, and right now there are way too many not getting work. I also believe that if you double the minimum wage, you double inflation within a fairly short period. Then your parent's savings are worth half and you will have to fill in the difference. Bottom line is government should butt out!!!
I am for a God given right to keep and bear arms, as described in the Constitution. Government should butt the hell out of that too!!!
I am for the Congress declaring war when necessary. If the Congress does so, the President should hit the enemy with the biggest hammer possible. Minimize our losses, don't worry about the rest, get 'er done and come home. If congress won't do that, butt out of that too.
In addition to that... I'm for personal responsibility. Let people reap the rewards of good decisions, and let them suffer the consequence of their bad decisions. If you bail out bad decisions, they will just make more bad decisions. I don't understand why I should pay for others not working, screwing up and even doing criminal stuff.
In addition, if I live my life in a way which I desire, and if in doing so, I don't harm another, nor his property, I should be left alone. There is a book that says that on average, a law abiding man/woman commits three felonies every day when trying to live with honor. That's just plain wrong.
I remember living in the plains of Eastern Colorado in the 1980s. The folks were hard working, law abiding, and while they were not highly educated, they were smart. As for voting, they wanted to know two things. If the person seeking office was an incumbent, that was a reason to vote against them (the longer you leave 'em in there, the more crooked they get) and if they were a lawyer (bad from the start). I've never forgot that.
As to politics, the blue dog dems are an endangered species. The majority of the party has shifted to socialist. I won't vote for a socialist as it runs contrary to my beliefs. I'm not saying I cannot respect them, just they will never get my vote. I respect those that vote their beliefs. Way too much in DC politics is voting the way the party tell you to. The republican party is at least under some fracturing of that.
The Dems just go in lock step like good little commies and we get health care take over as a result. The hammering is now "climate control" so they can control energy. They are already controlling education. They are already controlling the people by making them dependent. Writing is on the wall. The guns will be on the list too. Its not looking good for the country I want, and the Republicans aren't helping at all.
I'm libertarian. If Government doesn't need to be in it, it shouldn't be. If it needs to be involved, State and local governments are closer to the people and can be held to account far easier. We the people are above the Government, even though they don't act that way!
Greg
P33 how is Obama smacked down?
The House funds for the deportation of 400,000 and there are 10 million illegals. If the GOP does not fund for the deportation of 10 million amnesty is owned by them.
There are several cops on this forum. There are 5 cops working a precinct. There are 20 calls, 5 felonies, 5 misdemeanors and 10 quality of life calls. Who do you dispatch the cops to?
Thats all Obama is doing, prioritizing and identifying, the right thing to do.
Now the GOP can truly smack him down by passing a law to deport the 10 million illegals, what are they waiting for?
One point on your socialism claim, the facts are clear, the GOP under Bush were bigger socialists than Obama and Clinton combined.
Geeman, I am not 100% sold on Global Warming but what is wrong with keeping the planet clean.
I have a second home in upstate NY near a coal plant, those counties had higher asthma rates than NYC! They closed the plant and now the air is clean and the rates are dropping below NYC. They are also converting the plant to natural gas.
Ever see pictures of NYC and LA before the Clean Air Act?
Also Democrats are not commies, most are liberal that care about helping people. Both parties spend, the Democrats "Tax & Spend" while Republicans "Borrow & Spend." I prefer the D way its cheaper. I rather give to the poor than tax cuts for the rich.
What say you?
The latest push on coal fired plant is on mercury reduction, but that was just because it would be impossible to comply. In other words they were doing it to put coal, and the thousands that rely on it out of business. I'm all for nat gas. Its an excellent form of energy for the country. I'm not against coal though. Its as clean as it has ever been.
The Skunk Works has come out and claimed that fusion energy is about a decade from reality and a reactor would be the size of a large truck. If that is so, or even it its close to correct, the world's clean energy is solved. The market place will take care of that. Also, it would be a reason to not piss billions into a rat hole in the form of wind/solar renewable government funds. I don't think that should have been done in the first place.
I'm not of either of the parties you describe. I'm for MUCH LESS spending by the government sector. Look at the tasks the Federal government is allowed in the Constitution. That can't be that expensive, with the exception of defense. The rest is for the States and the people.
Handouts to those that won't work should stop. It makes them dependent and steals their spirit. If they don't want to work, that has a consequence, and that consequence is poverty. For those that cannot work, that is charity.
Greg
I have no problem with those taking aid to show up at their local government to work.
Quote from: Geeman on February 22 2015 08:09:56 PM MST
The latest push on coal fired plant is on mercury reduction, but that was just because it would be impossible to comply. In other words they were doing it to put coal, and the thousands that rely on it out of business. I'm all for nat gas. Its an excellent form of energy for the country. I'm not against coal though. Its as clean as it has ever been.
The Skunk Works has come out and claimed that fusion energy is about a decade from reality and a reactor would be the size of a large truck. If that is so, or even it its close to correct, the world's clean energy is solved. The market place will take care of that. Also, it would be a reason to not piss billions into a rat hole in the form of wind/solar renewable government funds. I don't think that should have been done in the first place.
I'm not of either of the parties you describe. I'm for MUCH LESS spending by the government sector. Look at the tasks the Federal government is allowed in the Constitution. That can't be that expensive, with the exception of defense. The rest is for the States and the people.
Handouts to those that won't work should stop. It makes them dependent and steals their spirit. If they don't want to work, that has a consequence, and that consequence is poverty. For those that cannot work, that is charity.
Greg
Yeah, remember when there was the big hubbub about cold fusion? Was the hottest thing going until nobody could duplicate the results. I'll believe fusion when it actually comes around, hopefully in my lifetime.
I remember the cold fusion fiasco well. I was I. freshmen physics taught by Dr. Stephen Jones. he was leading the cold fusion research at BYU at the time and worked closely with the two at the U of Utah.
needless to say a guest prof taught the rest of the semester as Dr Jones was at Los Alamos trying to replicate results.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Forum Fiend v1.2.5.
Come on, don't you know Obama is the "Chosen annointed one"?
Quote from: gandog56 on February 25 2015 08:44:00 AM MST
Yeah, remember when there was the big hubbub about cold fusion? Was the hottest thing going until nobody could duplicate the results. I'll believe fusion when it actually comes around, hopefully in my lifetime.
NOT!!! Cold fusion.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html)
Greg
I have a Fusion Firearms longslide 10mm! :D
Quote from: Wolfie on February 22 2015 07:30:29 PM MST
There are several cops on this forum. There are 5 cops working a precinct. There are 20 calls, 5 felonies, 5 misdemeanors and 10 quality of life calls. Who do you dispatch the cops to?
Thats all Obama is doing, prioritizing and identifying, the right thing to do.
Come on. Obama is doing more than that. If he was merely using "prosecutorial discretion" as he said, then the judge wouldn't have issued this ruling the way he did. The judge even wrote that Obama is saying one thing and doing another.
He isn't using his discretion to prosecute if he has changed the law to issue work permits to illegals. That has nothing to do with prosecution. He isn't using his discretion to prosecute if he is moving funds around to implement this action, renting an entire office building and hiring thousands of new government employees to handle the applications and issue permits. Congress handles budget issues, not the president.
The judge saw that and called him on it. Prosecutorial discretion is one thing. Using executive action to CHANGE a law passed by congress is something completely different. It's illegal. Unlawful. And an overreach of power.
Patriot you could be right but the judge blew it.
He should of stopped the parts that were illegal, this way all the focus would have been on the one issue and not the whole law.