Obama Issues Deportation Deferment Executive Order for Children of illegal immigrants - Page 4

Cain · 16th June 2012, 11:37 AM

At least conservatives are fair-minded about this stuff. They took Bush to task for proposing a Constitutional Amendment outlawing gay marriage. That had a realistic shot at passing, too!

crimresearch · 16th June 2012, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Cain

And if Carter had signed an amnesty law then it would be considered his greatest crime. Hispanics would be called "Jimmy Carter Mexicans." They'd say he did so much damage to the country that not even the Reagan messiah could save it.

Amnesty/guestworker legislation/turning a blind eye, whatever you want to call it, it has been the accepted policy of every administration going back to the 1920s/30s.
Only recently has it become useful as a wedge issue.

Biscuit · 16th June 2012, 02:15 PM

A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea.

BenBurch · 16th June 2012, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea.

If you think about the logical end point of their rhetoric, it makes sense.

quadraginta · 16th June 2012, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Will this policy allow those affected to obtain legal work status?

Yes. Sort of. They have to prove financial necessity, and they have to do it every two years.

You might want to look over the link I posted earlier. It answers nearly all of those sorts of questions.

Originally Posted by quadraginta

<snip>

Also, read this. It's the .pdf of the DHS announcement detailing what the administrative order really is.

quadraginta · 16th June 2012, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly

Originally Posted by quadraginta

In the video he said he couldn't "just suspend deportations". And he hasn't. In fact I believe he's been deporting illegals in record numbers, as compared to the Bush era.

He also said "That doesn't mean that we can't make decisions to emphasize, for example, enforcement on those who have engaged in criminal activity ...."

Which is exactly what he is doing with this policy.

But that's exactly what immigration enforcement and every president for the past 30 years has been doing, already.

Not really. They didn't announce a formal policy of deferring prosecution for a particular, limited subset of illegals.

There's a big difference between trying not to be too big of a target for prosecution and being secure in the knowledge that you aren't going to be.

Well ... for two years, anyhow.

Unabogie · 16th June 2012, 03:38 PM

And like clockwork, once the Teabaggers get wind that Obama likes a policy, it becomes pure poison.

Rubio, exit stage right.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.co...ream-act-after

Remind me again about how that meanie Obama won't work with Republicans?

Biscuit · 16th June 2012, 04:09 PM

Oh holy crap. I was stundie fishing over on ats and came across this thread

Unreal how confused and ignorant these people are.

shuize · 16th June 2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

You keep saying 'had to'.

Is that 'Had to or they would kill us'? 'Had to or we would have been arrested'?

Or 'Had to if we wanted her to obtain some perceived benefit to us'?

My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United States.

Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops.

If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported.

Cain · 16th June 2012, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Amnesty/guestworker legislation/turning a blind eye, whatever you want to call it, it has been the accepted policy of every administration going back to the 1920s/30s.
Only recently has it become useful as a wedge issue.

Wot??

It's almost as though you're suggesting immigration has played a major role in the development and evolution of the United States.

quadraginta · 16th June 2012, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by shuize

My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United states.

Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops.

If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported.

It isn't "de facto amnesty" either, until it is made "de facto" permanent.

Nice try, though.

RandFan · 16th June 2012, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by shuize

If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported.

If your wife had gotten into trouble with INS it would have been the very same trouble as any other illegal alien. It's a risk. Your wife chose not to take that risk. The children of illegal aliens don't chose to take a risk.

Jarlaxle · 16th June 2012, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Elypsis44

Agree.

I'd love to hear some of the forum conservatives square that up. It would be very entertaining to hear the denial, excuses and spin they'd put on the subject!

Any forum conservatives wanna take a crack at it?

It was tantamount to treason. Reagan should have been taken out and strung up from the nearest tree with piano wire for it.

Jarlaxle · 16th June 2012, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by shuize

My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United States.

Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops.

If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported.

You were stupid. You did it right. It's much easier to just enter and live here illegally!

Cleon · 16th June 2012, 07:35 PM

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

You were stupid. You did it right. It's much easier to just enter and live here illegally!

Sure! All shuize would've had to do was go back in time to when his wife was a child, convince her parents to move here illegally in order to raise her, so that Obama would allow her to avoid deportation in two-year increments when she got older without any guarantee of permanent residence or future citizenship. Piece of cake! What a chump shuize is.

shuize · 16th June 2012, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

If your wife had gotten into trouble with INS it would have been the very same trouble as any other illegal alien. It's a risk. Your wife chose not to take that risk. The children of illegal aliens don't chose to take a risk.

Yes, when they are children, their parents are taking the risk. The longer the illegal-alien parents allow their children to stay separated from their legal place of residence, the greater the risk of hardship -- not understanding the language, etc. -- if they are deported.

However, when they reach adulthood and continue to stay, then they are choosing to take the risk of deportation and hardship by continuing to stay illegally.

It's a crappy situation, but it's ultimately the fault of the parents who couldn't be bothered to follow the immigration laws of the United States in the first place.

Elypsis44 · 16th June 2012, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Oh holy crap. I was stundie fishing over on ats and came across this thread

Unreal how confused and ignorant these people are.

Yep, that's about the going rate for the conservative/Christian/republican voter base.

Want more LOLs? Look here.

RandFan · 16th June 2012, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by shuize

Yes, when they are children, their parents are taking the risk. The longer the illegal-alien parents allow their children to stay separated from their legal place of residence, the greater the risk of hardship -- not understanding the language, etc. -- if they are deported.

However, when they reach adulthood and continue to stay, then they are choosing to take the risk of deportation and hardship by continuing to stay illegally.

It's a crappy situation, but it's ultimately the fault of the parents who couldn't be bothered to follow the immigration laws of the United States in the first place.

Yep. I agree completely. That said, IMHO, none of which changes anything regarding your wife. It's not fair to your wife and those who do abide by the rules. It's just the best we can do in a difficult situation.

Biscuit · 17th June 2012, 09:56 AM

Romney won't say he'll overturn executive order

Watch mitt Romney run to the center!

Wolrab · 17th June 2012, 10:38 AM

If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants?

BenBurch · 17th June 2012, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Wolrab

If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants?

That's been covered. No referral will occur, but they also do not get deferral.

Profanz · 17th June 2012, 11:33 AM

Though I'm not originally from here, I live in Arizona. It's really not a big deal. These kids are Americans. This should have been done sooner in my opinion though.

Juniversal · 17th June 2012, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Romney won't say he'll overturn executive order

Watch mitt Romney run to the center!

lol Obama really put the Repubs between a rock and a hard place.

Not only (as Obama said) was it "the right thing to do" but it was also a smart political chess move.

BenBurch · 17th June 2012, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Juniversal

lol Obama really put the Repubs between a rock and a hard place.

Not only (as Obama said) was it "the right thing to do" but it was also a smart political chess move.

Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game.

BenBurch · 17th June 2012, 02:06 PM

BTW, my thought on another reason this was done now; Obama is very unsure of his re-election chances, and wanted this to be so fully in operation by November that no incoming administration will be able to change it without suffering a massive public backlash.

Juniversal · 17th June 2012, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game.

Chess = Anti-American!

quadraginta · 17th June 2012, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game.

Commie, too. You know who else likes chess?

Rooskies, that's who.

Not to mention all that royalty stuff ... Kings, Queens. Knights ...

Damned unAmerican.

Jarlaxle · 17th June 2012, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by Wolrab

If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants?

I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

tyr_13 · 17th June 2012, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

Quite A Modest Proposal there.

BenBurch · 18th June 2012, 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

Such a humanitarian.

Say... Wait a minute. If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?

pgwenthold · 18th June 2012, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha

Here's the number I found:

Quote:

As many as 800,000 young people, including tens of thousands in Texas, may be eligible for what’s legally called “deferred action” and a work permit, White House officials said Friday.

Can I just say that, if there are 800 000 people involved, that means an average of 16 000 per state. Assuming that not all states are going to have near the average, it is not unexpected that at least a few states are going to have "tens of thousands" (as in, at least 20 000). And I wouldn't be surprised that you would find that in the states near the borders that have the most illegals. Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California.

rcfieldz · 18th June 2012, 10:00 AM

So I thought presidents gave amnesty to people before their term was ending. Seems he is getting desperate for votes. And it kinda sounds like the gate is open for immigrants. Anyone between the ages of 16?(or was it 18) to 30 is immune to persecution(deportation)? What crazy loophole or change in laws will he make next without Congressional votes?

BenBurch · 18th June 2012, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

So I thought presidents gave amnesty to people beforetheir term was ending. Seems he is getting desperate for votes. And it kinda sounds like the gate is open for immigrants. Anyone between the ages of 16?(or was it 18) to 30 is immune to persecution? What crazy loophole or change in laws will he make next without Congressional votes?

I think your lack of any understanding of American law whatsoever is showing. Again.

First, this decision will possibly cost him the election, and so the idea of doing it for political gain is about the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time.

This is not the sort of pardon a President issues 5 minutes before getting into the limo for his successor's inauguration. Those are pardons for criminal matters, not administrative ones.

This is about Children and Young Adults who are being hurt very badly right now, and attempts to stop the damage in its tracks.

I don't know what sort of monster would see this happening, be able to do something, even something that may lose him millions of votes as this surely could, and defer the action to when it will be trivial for a successor will simply reverse it.

I don't know any monsters like that, but I bet you do.

I bet you don't know anybody brave enough to do what he did.

rcfieldz · 18th June 2012, 10:25 AM

My faceoff with Ben Burch continues....dates announced soon.

Travis · 18th June 2012, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea.

I saw that on facebook too. I guess it is making the rounds in the braindead right wing echo chambers.

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

.................not sure if serious...............

Biscuit · 18th June 2012, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

So I thought presidents gave amnesty to people before their term was ending.

Nobody was given amnesty.

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

Seems he is getting desperate for votes.

None of these people will be able to vote.

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

And it kinda sounds like the gate is open for immigrants.

Only sounds that way if you can't understand what you are hearing.

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

Anyone between the ages of 16?(or was it 18) to 30 is immune to persecution(deportation)? What crazy loophole or change in laws will he make next without Congressional votes?

The children of illegal immigrants ages 16 to 30 that have been in the USA for 5 straight years, graduated high school or college or served in the US military and have no criminal record.

They will not be immune from deportation but so long as they remain law abiding their deportation will be delayed with review every 2 years.

This does not change the law or create a loophole.

Elypsis44 · 18th June 2012, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

Ah, another compassionate conservative.

Originally Posted by rcfieldz

My faceoff with Ben Burch continues....dates announced soon.

I got $25.00 on Ben.

eeyore1954 · 19th June 2012, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by quadraginta

Commie, too. You know who else likes chess?

Rooskies, that's who.

Not to mention all that royalty stuff ... Kings, Queens. Knights ...

Damned unAmerican.

But at least the pawns can dream of becoming queens.

Fishstick · 19th June 2012, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by shuize

Our situation was complicated by the fact that my wife had to return to Japan to complete the process. If I count airfare and trips down to Tokyo, it was easily in the thousands of dollars. Also, because we have since returned to Japan, we get to start from zero if we ever want to live in the States again.

It's almost as if the Immigration policy itself is the underlying issue here. Naaah.

AlBell · 19th June 2012, 08:07 AM

Originally Posted by Fishstick

It's almost as if the Immigration policy itself is the underlying issue here. Naaah.

Yup. Unfortunately that policy is set by laws passed by congress. POTUS has taken an oath to defend those laws, and again ala DOMA Obama chose not to do so.

Damn shame there really isn't time for the house to impeach him, realizing the senate would not vote to convict.

16th June 2012, 11:37 AM	#121
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,933	At least conservatives are fair-minded about this stuff. They took Bush to task for proposing a Constitutional Amendment outlawing gay marriage. That had a realistic shot at passing, too!
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

16th June 2012, 02:05 PM	#122
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Cain And if Carter had signed an amnesty law then it would be considered his greatest crime. Hispanics would be called "Jimmy Carter Mexicans." They'd say he did so much damage to the country that not even the Reagan messiah could save it. Amnesty/guestworker legislation/turning a blind eye, whatever you want to call it, it has been the accepted policy of every administration going back to the 1920s/30s. Only recently has it become useful as a wedge issue.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

16th June 2012, 02:15 PM	#123
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

16th June 2012, 02:37 PM	#124
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Originally Posted by Biscuit A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea. If you think about the logical end point of their rhetoric, it makes sense.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

16th June 2012, 04:09 PM	#128
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	Oh holy crap. I was stundie fishing over on ats and came across this thread Unreal how confused and ignorant these people are.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

16th June 2012, 02:48 PM	#125
quadraginta What was the question? Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 7,906	Originally Posted by Biscuit Will this policy allow those affected to obtain legal work status? Yes. Sort of. They have to prove financial necessity, and they have to do it every two years. You might want to look over the link I posted earlier. It answers nearly all of those sorts of questions. Originally Posted by quadraginta <snip> Also, read this. It's the .pdf of the DHS announcement detailing what the administrative order really is.

16th June 2012, 02:57 PM	#126
quadraginta What was the question? Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 7,906	Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly Originally Posted by quadraginta In the video he said he couldn't "just suspend deportations". And he hasn't. In fact I believe he's been deporting illegals in record numbers, as compared to the Bush era. He also said "That doesn't mean that we can't make decisions to emphasize, for example, enforcement on those who have engaged in criminal activity ...." Which is exactly what he is doing with this policy. But that's exactly what immigration enforcement and every president for the past 30 years has been doing, already. Not really. They didn't announce a formal policy of deferring prosecution for a particular, limited subset of illegals. There's a big difference between trying not to be too big of a target for prosecution and being secure in the knowledge that you aren't going to be. Well ... for two years, anyhow.

16th June 2012, 03:38 PM	#127
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 5,842	And like clockwork, once the Teabaggers get wind that Obama likes a policy, it becomes pure poison. Rubio, exit stage right. http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.co...ream-act-after Remind me again about how that meanie Obama won't work with Republicans?

16th June 2012, 04:32 PM	#129
shuize Master Poster Join Date: May 2002 Location: Japan Posts: 2,305	Originally Posted by crimresearch You keep saying 'had to'. Is that 'Had to or they would kill us'? 'Had to or we would have been arrested'? Or 'Had to if we wanted her to obtain some perceived benefit to us'? My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United States. Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops. If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported.
	Last edited by shuize; 16th June 2012 at 04:38 PM.

16th June 2012, 04:39 PM	#130
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,933	Originally Posted by crimresearch Amnesty/guestworker legislation/turning a blind eye, whatever you want to call it, it has been the accepted policy of every administration going back to the 1920s/30s. Only recently has it become useful as a wedge issue. Wot?? It's almost as though you're suggesting immigration has played a major role in the development and evolution of the United States.
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

16th June 2012, 04:39 PM	#131
quadraginta What was the question? Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 7,906	Originally Posted by shuize My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United states. Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops. If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported. It isn't "de facto amnesty" either, until it is made "de facto" permanent. Nice try, though.

16th June 2012, 05:30 PM	#132
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,116	Originally Posted by shuize If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported. If your wife had gotten into trouble with INS it would have been the very same trouble as any other illegal alien. It's a risk. Your wife chose not to take that risk. The children of illegal aliens don't chose to take a risk.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

16th June 2012, 06:38 PM	#133
Jarlaxle Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: New England Posts: 452	Originally Posted by Elypsis44 Agree. I'd love to hear some of the forum conservatives square that up. It would be very entertaining to hear the denial, excuses and spin they'd put on the subject! Any forum conservatives wanna take a crack at it? It was tantamount to treason. Reagan should have been taken out and strung up from the nearest tree with piano wire for it.

16th June 2012, 06:41 PM	#134
Jarlaxle Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: New England Posts: 452	Originally Posted by shuize My wife had to return to Japan to comply with the directions of the Immigration and Nationalization Service so that we could live together in the United States. Unlike those who sneak in and get de facto amnesty merely by avoiding the law long enough, we jumped through all the legal hoops. If she had not, it would not have resulted in anyone being killed (although I doubt many if any of those who will get de facto amnesty under this new policy would be either), but overstaying her visa certainly could have gotten her in trouble with INS. So, to answer your question, yes, we had to do this to avoid risking her getting arrested and deported. You were stupid. You did it right. It's much easier to just enter and live here illegally!

16th June 2012, 07:35 PM	#135
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,506	Originally Posted by Jarlaxle You were stupid. You did it right. It's much easier to just enter and live here illegally! Sure! All shuize would've had to do was go back in time to when his wife was a child, convince her parents to move here illegally in order to raise her, so that Obama would allow her to avoid deportation in two-year increments when she got older without any guarantee of permanent residence or future citizenship. Piece of cake! What a chump shuize is.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

16th June 2012, 07:50 PM	#136
shuize Master Poster Join Date: May 2002 Location: Japan Posts: 2,305	Originally Posted by RandFan If your wife had gotten into trouble with INS it would have been the very same trouble as any other illegal alien. It's a risk. Your wife chose not to take that risk. The children of illegal aliens don't chose to take a risk. Yes, when they are children, their parents are taking the risk. The longer the illegal-alien parents allow their children to stay separated from their legal place of residence, the greater the risk of hardship -- not understanding the language, etc. -- if they are deported. However, when they reach adulthood and continue to stay, then they are choosing to take the risk of deportation and hardship by continuing to stay illegally. It's a crappy situation, but it's ultimately the fault of the parents who couldn't be bothered to follow the immigration laws of the United States in the first place.
	Last edited by shuize; 16th June 2012 at 07:54 PM.

16th June 2012, 08:00 PM	#137
Elypsis44 Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,393	Originally Posted by Biscuit Oh holy crap. I was stundie fishing over on ats and came across this thread Unreal how confused and ignorant these people are. Yep, that's about the going rate for the conservative/Christian/republican voter base. Want more LOLs? Look here.
Elypsis44 Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,393

16th June 2012, 08:10 PM	#138
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,116	Originally Posted by shuize Yes, when they are children, their parents are taking the risk. The longer the illegal-alien parents allow their children to stay separated from their legal place of residence, the greater the risk of hardship -- not understanding the language, etc. -- if they are deported. However, when they reach adulthood and continue to stay, then they are choosing to take the risk of deportation and hardship by continuing to stay illegally. It's a crappy situation, but it's ultimately the fault of the parents who couldn't be bothered to follow the immigration laws of the United States in the first place. Yep. I agree completely. That said, IMHO, none of which changes anything regarding your wife. It's not fair to your wife and those who do abide by the rules. It's just the best we can do in a difficult situation.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

17th June 2012, 09:56 AM	#139
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	Romney won't say he'll overturn executive order Watch mitt Romney run to the center!
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,764	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

17th June 2012, 10:38 AM	#140
Wolrab Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The Beautiful Finger Lakes Posts: 1,708	If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants?
	__________________ "Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov

17th June 2012, 11:10 AM	#141
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Originally Posted by Wolrab If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants? That's been covered. No referral will occur, but they also do not get deferral.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

17th June 2012, 11:33 AM	#142
Profanz Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 932	Though I'm not originally from here, I live in Arizona. It's really not a big deal. These kids are Americans. This should have been done sooner in my opinion though.
Profanz Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 932

17th June 2012, 01:23 PM	#143
Juniversal CIA + FBI + NWO Employee Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Cincinnati, USA Posts: 1,845	Originally Posted by Biscuit Romney won't say he'll overturn executive order Watch mitt Romney run to the center! lol Obama really put the Repubs between a rock and a hard place. Not only (as Obama said) was it "the right thing to do" but it was also a smart political chess move.
	__________________ "God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson

17th June 2012, 01:44 PM	#144
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Originally Posted by Juniversal lol Obama really put the Repubs between a rock and a hard place. Not only (as Obama said) was it "the right thing to do" but it was also a smart political chess move. Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now! Last edited by BenBurch; 17th June 2012 at 01:45 PM.

17th June 2012, 02:06 PM	#145
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	BTW, my thought on another reason this was done now; Obama is very unsure of his re-election chances, and wanted this to be so fully in operation by November that no incoming administration will be able to change it without suffering a massive public backlash.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

17th June 2012, 02:09 PM	#146
Juniversal CIA + FBI + NWO Employee Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Cincinnati, USA Posts: 1,845	Originally Posted by BenBurch Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game. Chess = Anti-American!
	__________________ "God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson

17th June 2012, 02:12 PM	#147
quadraginta What was the question? Join Date: May 2009 Location: Central Vale of Humility Posts: 7,906	Originally Posted by BenBurch Wait, the Right will respond that Chess is a Muslim game, and that Romney excels at Checkers, a fine American game. Commie, too. You know who else likes chess? Rooskies, that's who. Not to mention all that royalty stuff ... Kings, Queens. Knights ... Damned unAmerican.

17th June 2012, 07:06 PM	#148
Jarlaxle Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: New England Posts: 452	Originally Posted by Wolrab If they know who these children of illegal immigrants are, what is proposed for the parents who are the intentional illegal immigrants? I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them.

17th June 2012, 07:19 PM	#149
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,652	Originally Posted by Jarlaxle I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them. Quite A Modest Proposal there.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

18th June 2012, 05:25 AM	#150
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Originally Posted by Jarlaxle I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them. Such a humanitarian. Say... Wait a minute. If vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th June 2012, 08:32 AM	#151
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 12,066	Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha Here's the number I found: Quote: As many as 800,000 young people, including tens of thousands in Texas, may be eligible for what’s legally called “deferred action” and a work permit, White House officials said Friday. Can I just say that, if there are 800 000 people involved, that means an average of 16 000 per state. Assuming that not all states are going to have near the average, it is not unexpected that at least a few states are going to have "tens of thousands" (as in, at least 20 000). And I wouldn't be surprised that you would find that in the states near the borders that have the most illegals. Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California.
	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

18th June 2012, 10:00 AM	#152
rcfieldz Muse Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 819	Obama Issues Amnesty So I thought presidents gave amnesty to people before their term was ending. Seems he is getting desperate for votes. And it kinda sounds like the gate is open for immigrants. Anyone between the ages of 16?(or was it 18) to 30 is immune to persecution(deportation)? What crazy loophole or change in laws will he make next without Congressional votes?
	__________________ http://www.mynvfi.org/ Last edited by rcfieldz; 18th June 2012 at 10:09 AM.

18th June 2012, 10:13 AM	#153
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,090	Originally Posted by rcfieldz So I thought presidents gave amnesty to people beforetheir term was ending. Seems he is getting desperate for votes. And it kinda sounds like the gate is open for immigrants. Anyone between the ages of 16?(or was it 18) to 30 is immune to persecution? What crazy loophole or change in laws will he make next without Congressional votes? I think your lack of any understanding of American law whatsoever is showing. Again. First, this decision will possibly cost him the election, and so the idea of doing it for political gain is about the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time. This is not the sort of pardon a President issues 5 minutes before getting into the limo for his successor's inauguration. Those are pardons for criminal matters, not administrative ones. This is about Children and Young Adults who are being hurt very badly right now, and attempts to stop the damage in its tracks. I don't know what sort of monster would see this happening, be able to do something, even something that may lose him millions of votes as this surely could, and defer the action to when it will be trivial for a successor will simply reverse it. I don't know any monsters like that, but I bet you do. I bet you don't know anybody brave enough to do what he did.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

18th June 2012, 10:25 AM	#154
rcfieldz Muse Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 819	hmmm My faceoff with Ben Burch continues....dates announced soon.
	__________________ http://www.mynvfi.org/

18th June 2012, 11:11 AM	#155
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,937	Originally Posted by Biscuit A conservative friend posted on fb saying that if you illegally cross the border into N Korea you get shot but if you illegally cross the border into America you get a tax free business for 7 years and a bunch of other nonsense. I can't believe conservatives' aspirations for America are to be more like N Korea. I saw that on facebook too. I guess it is making the rounds in the braindead right wing echo chambers. Originally Posted by Jarlaxle I have a proposal: ship them to the border and put them to work walling off Mexico. When it's done, deport them. If they try to return, shoot them. .................not sure if serious...............
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy