It has been reported that obama never did a EO on immigration

[bigrebnc1775]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan and Bush were republicans, Obama's a democrat.

But you knew that already.

 

[BULLDOG]

Bullshit's ignorance is astounding.

Obumbler does suck massive ass. But what he has proposed doing is clearly improper. Only a complete fuckwit would deny that,

Now then, I am not a tea partier but i do respect those who step up as they do.

You abject degenerate uber lolberals are the ones who engage in tea bagging. So stop projecting, you completely dishonest pussy.

I don't favor suing Obumbler for his faux EO or any of the actual actions he might take to permit a massive unauthorized illegal immigrant amnesty. On the other hand, my little Bullshit friend, you are ALSO wrong (this becomes monotonous) in claiming that you can't sue another for a proposed action. You dick for brain waste of life, you never heard of an "injunction?" Damn you suck at everything related to this debate, you poor pathetic nitwit.

Now, since you are too plodding to even ask why, I'll just tell you why I oppose the notion of this lawsuit. Congress already HAS the Constitutional power and duty to stop Obumbler from doing this shit. What they lack (because Boehner and company are panty waist pussies) is the determination to DO that which is within the power. They lack the nadz to honor their own Constitutional obligations.

And asshole lolberal Democratics like you wear their cheerleader skirts, wave the pom poms, jump, do a couple of splits and applaud them for it.

An injunction is obtained through an application process which might or might not include testimony before a judge. It might be given in conjunction with suing someone, but they are not the same thing. That's a mistake a dumb pathetic nitwit might make so it's not unexpected from you. You are really quick with the "dumb fucks" and "dishonest pussies". If that is the way you prefer to discuss, I'm fine with it, but that's your choice.

One seeks an injunction, you twit, when one seeks to get a court ruling ordering another party to stop doing something. There are all manner and forms of legal relief. But when the dunces in Congress speak of "suing" Obumbler to stop him, they are clearly just using an offhand figure of speech to talk about getting a court order.

Stop quibbling. It's difficult to make yourself look smaller and more petty and dishonest, but you are managing it.

I cannot prevent you from constantly proving that you are an ignorant and dishonest dumb fuck, but you really shouldn't make it so easy.

So you think you can use whatever words pop into your head, and then comeback and define what they mean? I will admit one of us is looking ignorant and dishonest, but it's not me.

 

[BULLDOG]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

OK officer goober. What was that newly created law that Saint Ronald was tying loose ends up in? You dumb fuck

 

[Care4all]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

They BOTH, Reagan and Bush 1 delayed the law through executive action....these groups of illegals were NOT given amnesty by Congress in their Immigration Act, that they voted on....you are either covered by the Immigration Law passed by congress or you are not, and these people that they gave delayed deportation protection to, WERE NOT covered by the law these congress critters passed.

no excuses.....

other than minutia, there is no difference, in the actions done by all 3 of these presidents....

it could be that none of them over reached with executive action, or all of them over reached with executive action....but if it was ok for Reagan and for Bush 1, then this set precedence for it to be ok with President Obama.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

They BOTH, Reagan and Bush 1 delayed the law through executive action....these groups of illegals were NOT given amnesty by Congress in their Immigration Act, that they voted on....you are either covered by the Immigration Law passed by congress or you are not, and these people that they gave delayed deportation protection to, WERE NOT covered by the law these congress critters passed.

no excuses.....

other than minutia, there is no difference, in the actions done by all 3 of these presidents....

it could be that none of them over reached with executive action, or all of them over reached with executive action....but if it was ok for Reagan and for Bush 1, then this set precedence for it to be ok with President Obama.

Nonsense. Obumbler is making law (or claiming that he is about to do so) DESPITE the fact that Congress had REFUSED to pass what he wants them to pass.

Reagan and Bush merely addressed some gaps in the laws that WERE passed by invoking their discretion on whether or not to seek deportation -- for a period of time.

But again, the main point is that they were acting on a LAW that had been enacted. Obumbler is acting BECAUSE Congress declines to do as he wishes.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

When former President Reagan acted along such lines, he did so on the BASIS of an ACT of CONGRESS.

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

OK officer goober. What was that newly created law that Saint Ronald was tying loose ends up in? You dumb fuck

The dumb fuck is you -- the utter pussy who demands answers all the time but won't even man up long enough to find his own nadz and answer any questions put to him.

You hypocritical rancid rat vagina.

You gutless coward stupid hypocritical roach ****.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Bullshit's ignorance is astounding.

Obumbler does suck massive ass. But what he has proposed doing is clearly improper. Only a complete fuckwit would deny that,

Now then, I am not a tea partier but i do respect those who step up as they do.

You abject degenerate uber lolberals are the ones who engage in tea bagging. So stop projecting, you completely dishonest pussy.

I don't favor suing Obumbler for his faux EO or any of the actual actions he might take to permit a massive unauthorized illegal immigrant amnesty. On the other hand, my little Bullshit friend, you are ALSO wrong (this becomes monotonous) in claiming that you can't sue another for a proposed action. You dick for brain waste of life, you never heard of an "injunction?" Damn you suck at everything related to this debate, you poor pathetic nitwit.

Now, since you are too plodding to even ask why, I'll just tell you why I oppose the notion of this lawsuit. Congress already HAS the Constitutional power and duty to stop Obumbler from doing this shit. What they lack (because Boehner and company are panty waist pussies) is the determination to DO that which is within the power. They lack the nadz to honor their own Constitutional obligations.

And asshole lolberal Democratics like you wear their cheerleader skirts, wave the pom poms, jump, do a couple of splits and applaud them for it.

An injunction is obtained through an application process which might or might not include testimony before a judge. It might be given in conjunction with suing someone, but they are not the same thing. That's a mistake a dumb pathetic nitwit might make so it's not unexpected from you. You are really quick with the "dumb fucks" and "dishonest pussies". If that is the way you prefer to discuss, I'm fine with it, but that's your choice.

One seeks an injunction, you twit, when one seeks to get a court ruling ordering another party to stop doing something. There are all manner and forms of legal relief. But when the dunces in Congress speak of "suing" Obumbler to stop him, they are clearly just using an offhand figure of speech to talk about getting a court order.

Stop quibbling. It's difficult to make yourself look smaller and more petty and dishonest, but you are managing it.

I cannot prevent you from constantly proving that you are an ignorant and dishonest dumb fuck, but you really shouldn't make it so easy.

So you think you can use whatever words pop into your head, and then comeback and define what they mean? I will admit one of us is looking ignorant and dishonest, but it's not me.

No asswipe. It's you. Totally.

You need to admit that you are a useless dishonest hypocritical cockroach anus. Confess it, bitch.

You remain utterly pwnd. It's obvious to all.

 

[BULLDOG]

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

They BOTH, Reagan and Bush 1 delayed the law through executive action....these groups of illegals were NOT given amnesty by Congress in their Immigration Act, that they voted on....you are either covered by the Immigration Law passed by congress or you are not, and these people that they gave delayed deportation protection to, WERE NOT covered by the law these congress critters passed.

no excuses.....

other than minutia, there is no difference, in the actions done by all 3 of these presidents....

it could be that none of them over reached with executive action, or all of them over reached with executive action....but if it was ok for Reagan and for Bush 1, then this set precedence for it to be ok with President Obama.

Nonsense. Obumbler is making law (or claiming that he is about to do so) DESPITE the fact that Congress had REFUSED to pass what he wants them to pass.

Reagan and Bush merely addressed some gaps in the laws that WERE passed by invoking their discretion on whether or not to seek deportation -- for a period of time.

But again, the main point is that they were acting on a LAW that had been enacted. Obumbler is acting BECAUSE Congress declines to do as he wishes.

I've asked before with no answer, but what specific laws were they acting on?

 

[BULLDOG]

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

OK officer goober. What was that newly created law that Saint Ronald was tying loose ends up in? You dumb fuck

The dumb fuck is you -- the utter pussy who demands answers all the time but won't even man up long enough to find his own nadz and answer any questions put to him.

You hypocritical rancid rat vagina.

You gutless coward stupid hypocritical roach ****.

childish rants.........It wasn't my claim. You make a claim, you back it up. That's the adult way things work, but if you are just a whiney child......

 

[BULLDOG]

Bullshit's ignorance is astounding.

Obumbler does suck massive ass. But what he has proposed doing is clearly improper. Only a complete fuckwit would deny that,

Now then, I am not a tea partier but i do respect those who step up as they do.

You abject degenerate uber lolberals are the ones who engage in tea bagging. So stop projecting, you completely dishonest pussy.

I don't favor suing Obumbler for his faux EO or any of the actual actions he might take to permit a massive unauthorized illegal immigrant amnesty. On the other hand, my little Bullshit friend, you are ALSO wrong (this becomes monotonous) in claiming that you can't sue another for a proposed action. You dick for brain waste of life, you never heard of an "injunction?" Damn you suck at everything related to this debate, you poor pathetic nitwit.

Now, since you are too plodding to even ask why, I'll just tell you why I oppose the notion of this lawsuit. Congress already HAS the Constitutional power and duty to stop Obumbler from doing this shit. What they lack (because Boehner and company are panty waist pussies) is the determination to DO that which is within the power. They lack the nadz to honor their own Constitutional obligations.

And asshole lolberal Democratics like you wear their cheerleader skirts, wave the pom poms, jump, do a couple of splits and applaud them for it.

An injunction is obtained through an application process which might or might not include testimony before a judge. It might be given in conjunction with suing someone, but they are not the same thing. That's a mistake a dumb pathetic nitwit might make so it's not unexpected from you. You are really quick with the "dumb fucks" and "dishonest pussies". If that is the way you prefer to discuss, I'm fine with it, but that's your choice.

One seeks an injunction, you twit, when one seeks to get a court ruling ordering another party to stop doing something. There are all manner and forms of legal relief. But when the dunces in Congress speak of "suing" Obumbler to stop him, they are clearly just using an offhand figure of speech to talk about getting a court order.

Stop quibbling. It's difficult to make yourself look smaller and more petty and dishonest, but you are managing it.

I cannot prevent you from constantly proving that you are an ignorant and dishonest dumb fuck, but you really shouldn't make it so easy.

So you think you can use whatever words pop into your head, and then comeback and define what they mean? I will admit one of us is looking ignorant and dishonest, but it's not me.

No asswipe. It's you. Totally.

You need to admit that you are a useless dishonest hypocritical cockroach anus. Confess it, bitch.

You remain utterly pwnd. It's obvious to all.

If you say so, but only a silly teabagger would be impressed with your unnecessary vile rants. Adults would pity someone who behaves like that. Do you actually have anything to add or do you just like attention?

 

[Care4all]

Can you show us what act of congress granted 400,000 Nicaraguans work visas and indefinitely deferred their deportation?

Remember, Reagan acted after Congress tried and failed to address the issue.

Show us the Reagan EO or order or his minion's actions and orders. Date and link it/them.

I will be pleased to then show you how and why your claims are false.

"Reagan also used an executive action to ease immigration standards for 200,000 Nicaraguans who feared persecution from the communist Sandinista regime. President Bush used similar powers to grant deportation relief to hundreds of Kuwaiti nationals who had been evacuated to the United States during the first Gulf War.

But both of these executive actions were perfectly in line with the true scope of a president's prosecutorial discretion powers. They were limited in nature, applied to specific smaller groups of immigrants, and were not designed to thwart congressional intent on immigration policy." -- Everything You Need To Know About Obama s Executive Amnesty

That post is worth reading since it QUOTES Presidunce Obumbler ACKNOWLEDGING that what he has proposed doing is illegal. He knew it before, but musta forgotten what he once acknowledged because he is a compulsive liar or a fucking moron -- or both.

Reagan used an Executive action with INS, to give illegal children of the immigrants given amnesty in the 1986 Immigration Act, delayed deportation protection.

And in Feb 1990 GHW Bush gave an executive action for INS to delay deportation and give authorization to work, the illegal immigrant spouses of those given amnesty in 1986, who did not qualify for amnesty in 1986.

so what's the difference between these actions of Reagan and Bush 1 and what Obama did?

Reagan did it to tie up the loose ends of a newly created by congress law. He didn't change a law

They BOTH, Reagan and Bush 1 delayed the law through executive action....these groups of illegals were NOT given amnesty by Congress in their Immigration Act, that they voted on....you are either covered by the Immigration Law passed by congress or you are not, and these people that they gave delayed deportation protection to, WERE NOT covered by the law these congress critters passed.

no excuses.....

other than minutia, there is no difference, in the actions done by all 3 of these presidents....

it could be that none of them over reached with executive action, or all of them over reached with executive action....but if it was ok for Reagan and for Bush 1, then this set precedence for it to be ok with President Obama.

Nonsense. Obumbler is making law (or claiming that he is about to do so) DESPITE the fact that Congress had REFUSED to pass what he wants them to pass.

Reagan and Bush merely addressed some gaps in the laws that WERE passed by invoking their discretion on whether or not to seek deportation -- for a period of time.

But again, the main point is that they were acting on a LAW that had been enacted. Obumbler is acting BECAUSE Congress declines to do as he wishes.

The Delayed deportation protection is temporary, for 2 or 3 years at a time... Obama can change his action with prioritizing with INS tomorrow, and congress can change it tomorrow, and the executive action can end when a new president comes and changes it, if they wish....

There is nothing permanent going on here, only congress can do that, with the President's signature, via law.

===============================

As far as Reagan and Bush 1, they BOTH had executive actions with INS that gave delayed deportation protection to illegals that were NOT given Amnesty by Congress in 1986. I have posted this several times in all the different threads on this same topic

Here's a timeline:

—1986. Congress and Reagan enacted a sweeping overhaul that gave legal status to up to 3 million immigrants without authorization to be in the country, if they had come to the U.S. before 1982. Spouses and children who could not meet that test did not qualify, which incited protests that the new law was breaking up families.



—1987. Early efforts in Congress to amend the law to cover family members failed. Reagan's Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner announced that minor children of parents granted amnesty by the law would get protection from deportation. Spouses and children of couples in which one parent qualified for amnesty but the other did not remained subject to deportation, leading to efforts to amend the 1986 law.



—1989. By a sweeping 81-17 vote, the Senate in July voted to prohibit deportations of family members of immigrants covered by the 1986 law. The House failed to act.



—1990. In February, President George H.W. Bush, acting through the Immigration and Naturalization Service, established a "family fairness" in which family members living with a legalizing immigrant and who were in the U.S. before passage of the 1986 law were granted protection from deportation and authorized to seek employment. The administration estimated up to 1.5 million people would be covered by the policy. Congress in October passed a broader immigration law that made the protections permanent.

As you can see, Reagan's Congress COULD NOT pass a law covering these illegal children, congress made efforts to TRY to do this, but it FAILED in 1987, 1 year after Immigration reform passed in 1986. So Congress could NOT agree on supporting Reagan's executive Action giving these illegals deportation protection.

And with President Bush1, in 1989 his Senate passed immigration reform that would have covered the illegals that Reagan gave protection of deportation to and the illegals that Bush 1 wanted to give deportation protection to, BUT the House COULD NOT AND DID NOT PASS a bill, so the efforts of congress FAILED.

In 1990 Pres. Bush 1 issued executive Action of deportation protection AND THE AUTHORIZATION TO WORK, for the illegal spouses who were not covered by, who did not qualify for Amnesty in 1986, of the immigrants that did qualify and were given Amnesty in 1986....

So congress did NOTgive these illegal spouses amnesty, but Pres, Bush1 thru executive action gave them deportation protection AND Authorization to work.

Then 9 months later, congress FINALLY got their act together, and was FINALLY able to pass Immigration reform and FINALLY covered the executive actions of Reagan 3 years earlier and Bush 1 earlier that year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

So I ask, ONCE AGAIN, what is the difference?

and I NOTE again, if it turns out to be illegal for Obama, then it was illegal with Reagan and Bush1 as well...or if it was legal for Reagan and Bush 1's delayed deportation and authorizations to work, then it is legal for Obama as well imo.