In Regards To DACA, what Should Be The Priority?

[NightFox]

Dear Cardinal Richelieu,

Apparently the Constitution and the Rule of Law aren't your cup of tea.

Perhaps someday the absolutist Presidency you're looking for will emerge but today isn't that day.

"They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men." -- John Adams

If all we did was follow the rule of law and not push to evolve our laws .

LOL, Trump is trying to do both and you're proposing that we do neither and just govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings".

"Evolving our laws" is a pointless exercise if you supplant the rule of law with rule by executive branch fiat.

Way to destroy your own weak attempt at an argument.

When did I propose that we govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings"?

Right here...

threaten 750,000 people with deportation to motivate congress

"threaten"; we should feel sorry for them and chuck the rule of law out the fucking window because the rule of law is mean.

Looks like an appeal to emotion, quacks like an appeal to emotion, we have to at least consider the possibility that it's an appeal to emotion.

Perhaps your failure to recognize it as such stems from the fact that you can't recognize the difference between acting based on emotion and proper Constitutional order.

If President Nimrod had "motivated" Congress to act over the last 5 years and exercise its Constitutionally vested legislative authority and the relevant Article I Section 8 enumerated power it enjoys it wouldn't have come to this, so perhaps your anger would be more appropriately directed at him instead of the current moron in the Oval Office who is actually doing something right for a change.

President Nimrod, as you call him, tried many times to get a stagnant congress to act. They failed to do anything with immigration reform for the better part of two decades.

In other words President Nimrod, the guy that was supposed to be the leader failed to persuade Congress and it's constituents that it was the right thing to do, yet instead of him following proper constitutional order and rescinding his executive order for prosecutorial discretion in the deportation of "the dreamers" since he lacked the Constitutional Authority to in effect unilaterally alter federal legislation, he behaved as a small child would and stubbornly ignored the representatives of the majority will of the people, because as usual with the Nimrod his opinion was the only one that counted (a trait shared by many would be autocrats).

Thus we are here, where President Twitter has to clean up a mess made by President Nimrod, because President Nimrod lacked both effective leadership skills and humility.

DACA was an overreach but it was what he did to provide temporary relief to a group of nearly 1 million children and teenagers who were living in the shadows. Sure you can blame it on "feelings". How many laws that involve human rights were motivated by feelings? All of them? The emancipation proclamation to free slaves, the EO's to desegregate schools and the military etc. Of course feelings are involved...

Apparently you don't understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on generally accepted morality.

Maybe these examples will help:
The Nuremberg Laws = enacted due to a purely emotional response (fear & anger mostly)
Amendment XIII to the U.S. Constitution = enacted due to the generally accepted belief that slavery was immoral (props to President Lincoln and all the abolitionist cohorts that PERSUADED the majority will of the people that this was true).

See the difference?

and we have a process to repeal laws or EO's that we feel are unconstitutional which is what happened with DACA and DAPA. Obama's goal was to provide some temporary relief and opportunity until the congress pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out how to legislate. I'd say he was pretty successful in accomplishing his goal.

LOL, what a laudable goal... let "the dreamers" stay for a few years, give 'em hope and then have that hope smashed on the rocks when someone finally got around to mounting a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation of legislative authority. Like I said before, those taking up the cause of "the dreamers" should be angry with President Nimrod for not following through using proper Constitutional order, he had more than enough time to do so.

 

[Slade3200]

If all we did was follow the rule of law and not push to evolve our laws .

LOL, Trump is trying to do both and you're proposing that we do neither and just govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings".

"Evolving our laws" is a pointless exercise if you supplant the rule of law with rule by executive branch fiat.

Way to destroy your own weak attempt at an argument.

When did I propose that we govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings"?

Right here...

threaten 750,000 people with deportation to motivate congress

"threaten"; we should feel sorry for them and chuck the rule of law out the fucking window because the rule of law is mean.

Looks like an appeal to emotion, quacks like an appeal to emotion, we have to at least consider the possibility that it's an appeal to emotion.

Perhaps your failure to recognize it as such stems from the fact that you can't recognize the difference between acting based on emotion and proper Constitutional order.

If President Nimrod had "motivated" Congress to act over the last 5 years and exercise its Constitutionally vested legislative authority and the relevant Article I Section 8 enumerated power it enjoys it wouldn't have come to this, so perhaps your anger would be more appropriately directed at him instead of the current moron in the Oval Office who is actually doing something right for a change.

President Nimrod, as you call him, tried many times to get a stagnant congress to act. They failed to do anything with immigration reform for the better part of two decades.

In other words President Nimrod, the guy that was supposed to be the leader failed to persuade Congress and it's constituents that it was the right thing to do, yet instead of him following proper constitutional order and rescinding his executive order for prosecutorial discretion in the deportation of "the dreamers" since he lacked the Constitutional Authority to in effect unilaterally alter federal legislation, he behaved as a small child would and stubbornly ignored the representatives of the majority will of the people, because as usual with the Nimrod his opinion was the only one that counted (a trait shared by many would be autocrats).

Thus we are here, where President Twitter has to clean up a mess made by President Nimrod, because President Nimrod lacked both effective leadership skills and humility.

DACA was an overreach but it was what he did to provide temporary relief to a group of nearly 1 million children and teenagers who were living in the shadows. Sure you can blame it on "feelings". How many laws that involve human rights were motivated by feelings? All of them? The emancipation proclamation to free slaves, the EO's to desegregate schools and the military etc. Of course feelings are involved...

Apparently you don't understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on generally accepted morality.

Maybe these examples will help:
The Nuremberg Laws = enacted due to a purely emotional response (fear & anger mostly)
Amendment XIII to the U.S. Constitution = enacted due to the generally accepted belief that slavery was immoral (props to President Lincoln and all the abolitionist cohorts that PERSUADED the majority will of the people that this was true).

See the difference?

and we have a process to repeal laws or EO's that we feel are unconstitutional which is what happened with DACA and DAPA. Obama's goal was to provide some temporary relief and opportunity until the congress pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out how to legislate. I'd say he was pretty successful in accomplishing his goal.

LOL, what a laudable goal... let "the dreamers" stay for a few years, give 'em hope and then have that hope smashed on the rocks when someone finally got around to mounting a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation of legislative authority. Like I said before, those taking up the cause of "the dreamers" should be angry with President Nimrod for not following through using proper Constitutional order, he had more than enough time to do so.

The dream act was tried through congress many times. Our useless congress kept loading it up with other immigration agenda items and it never passed. Nothing was being done so Obama took action and successfully gave these kids opportunity to work and seek an education. It appears now that Trump is going to lead an effort to solidify a law to protect them. I don't like the chaotic way it's being done by Trump but if it gets the right results Through his leadership then I will give him credit. Like it or not what Obama did was effective.

 

[John Shaw]

Priority 1: Keep all the sexy ones.

 

[Zander]

The COTUS takes precedence. Always.

These so-called "dreamers" have only their parents to blame. They are the ones that put them in harms way when they brought them here ILLEGALLY.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Common sense should be the priority. Grandfather in the current dreamers, then go ahead and pass whatever specific policy you can get through Congress to handle this matter in the future.

 

[RodISHI]

Common sense should be the priority. Grandfather in the current dreamers, then go ahead and pass whatever specific policy you can get through Congress to handle this matter in the future.

No. Ship them and their illegal parents back to there country of origin.

 

[NightFox]

LOL, Trump is trying to do both and you're proposing that we do neither and just govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings".

"Evolving our laws" is a pointless exercise if you supplant the rule of law with rule by executive branch fiat.

Way to destroy your own weak attempt at an argument.

When did I propose that we govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings"?

Right here...

threaten 750,000 people with deportation to motivate congress

"threaten"; we should feel sorry for them and chuck the rule of law out the fucking window because the rule of law is mean.

Looks like an appeal to emotion, quacks like an appeal to emotion, we have to at least consider the possibility that it's an appeal to emotion.

Perhaps your failure to recognize it as such stems from the fact that you can't recognize the difference between acting based on emotion and proper Constitutional order.

If President Nimrod had "motivated" Congress to act over the last 5 years and exercise its Constitutionally vested legislative authority and the relevant Article I Section 8 enumerated power it enjoys it wouldn't have come to this, so perhaps your anger would be more appropriately directed at him instead of the current moron in the Oval Office who is actually doing something right for a change.

President Nimrod, as you call him, tried many times to get a stagnant congress to act. They failed to do anything with immigration reform for the better part of two decades.

In other words President Nimrod, the guy that was supposed to be the leader failed to persuade Congress and it's constituents that it was the right thing to do, yet instead of him following proper constitutional order and rescinding his executive order for prosecutorial discretion in the deportation of "the dreamers" since he lacked the Constitutional Authority to in effect unilaterally alter federal legislation, he behaved as a small child would and stubbornly ignored the representatives of the majority will of the people, because as usual with the Nimrod his opinion was the only one that counted (a trait shared by many would be autocrats).

Thus we are here, where President Twitter has to clean up a mess made by President Nimrod, because President Nimrod lacked both effective leadership skills and humility.

DACA was an overreach but it was what he did to provide temporary relief to a group of nearly 1 million children and teenagers who were living in the shadows. Sure you can blame it on "feelings". How many laws that involve human rights were motivated by feelings? All of them? The emancipation proclamation to free slaves, the EO's to desegregate schools and the military etc. Of course feelings are involved...

Apparently you don't understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on generally accepted morality.

Maybe these examples will help:
The Nuremberg Laws = enacted due to a purely emotional response (fear & anger mostly)
Amendment XIII to the U.S. Constitution = enacted due to the generally accepted belief that slavery was immoral (props to President Lincoln and all the abolitionist cohorts that PERSUADED the majority will of the people that this was true).

See the difference?

and we have a process to repeal laws or EO's that we feel are unconstitutional which is what happened with DACA and DAPA. Obama's goal was to provide some temporary relief and opportunity until the congress pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out how to legislate. I'd say he was pretty successful in accomplishing his goal.

LOL, what a laudable goal... let "the dreamers" stay for a few years, give 'em hope and then have that hope smashed on the rocks when someone finally got around to mounting a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation of legislative authority. Like I said before, those taking up the cause of "the dreamers" should be angry with President Nimrod for not following through using proper Constitutional order, he had more than enough time to do so.

The dream act was tried through congress many times. Our useless congress kept loading it up with other immigration agenda items and it never passed.

Uh-huh because the President never made a convincing reason & evidence based case that it was the right thing to do from a social, economic and security standpoint, it's the President's job to do this and failing that the appropriate thing to do would have been to rescind his EO, however President Nimrod choose to leave it intact, which leads one to believe that his intention was to create a wedge issue to serve as a thorn in the side of his political opponents, which is what he's managed to accomplish.

Don't forget the Nimrod had control of both Houses of Congress for 2 years after his election and if this had REALLY been an issue that needed resolving he had both the time and opportunity to accomplish it via normal order, this only became an issue he "cared about" AFTER the Republicans took control of the House and thus it gave him the opportunity to make it a political one.

Nothing was being done so Obama took action and successfully gave these kids opportunity to work and seek an education. It appears now that Trump is going to lead an effort to solidify a law to protect them. I don't like the chaotic way it's being done by Trump but if it gets the right results Through his leadership then I will give him credit. Like it or not what Obama did was effective.

You still don't seem to understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on reason, the legislative process that we have as messy and inefficient as it may be is the only way to achieve a triumph of reason over emotion, since debate and deliberation (i.e. weighing immediate and opportunity costs as well as social impact prior to making any decisions) is required to accomplish that objective. "Giving these kids the opportunity to work and seek an education" is not a justification for the Executive to usurp legislative authority, it's an appeal to sympathy by a would be autocrat, the case must be made based on economic and social criteria that both justifies the costs and mitigates any potential negative societal effects and then Constitutional order must be observed else the rule of law is undermined.

All that Obama accomplished was to turn "the dreamers" into political pawns while at the same time further dividing the citizenry and distracting the political machinery in Washington from FAR more urgent matters.

 

[RodISHI]

When did I propose that we govern the country by the dictates of our "feelings"?

Right here...

threaten 750,000 people with deportation to motivate congress

"threaten"; we should feel sorry for them and chuck the rule of law out the fucking window because the rule of law is mean.

Looks like an appeal to emotion, quacks like an appeal to emotion, we have to at least consider the possibility that it's an appeal to emotion.

Perhaps your failure to recognize it as such stems from the fact that you can't recognize the difference between acting based on emotion and proper Constitutional order.

If President Nimrod had "motivated" Congress to act over the last 5 years and exercise its Constitutionally vested legislative authority and the relevant Article I Section 8 enumerated power it enjoys it wouldn't have come to this, so perhaps your anger would be more appropriately directed at him instead of the current moron in the Oval Office who is actually doing something right for a change.

President Nimrod, as you call him, tried many times to get a stagnant congress to act. They failed to do anything with immigration reform for the better part of two decades.

In other words President Nimrod, the guy that was supposed to be the leader failed to persuade Congress and it's constituents that it was the right thing to do, yet instead of him following proper constitutional order and rescinding his executive order for prosecutorial discretion in the deportation of "the dreamers" since he lacked the Constitutional Authority to in effect unilaterally alter federal legislation, he behaved as a small child would and stubbornly ignored the representatives of the majority will of the people, because as usual with the Nimrod his opinion was the only one that counted (a trait shared by many would be autocrats).

Thus we are here, where President Twitter has to clean up a mess made by President Nimrod, because President Nimrod lacked both effective leadership skills and humility.

DACA was an overreach but it was what he did to provide temporary relief to a group of nearly 1 million children and teenagers who were living in the shadows. Sure you can blame it on "feelings". How many laws that involve human rights were motivated by feelings? All of them? The emancipation proclamation to free slaves, the EO's to desegregate schools and the military etc. Of course feelings are involved...

Apparently you don't understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on generally accepted morality.

Maybe these examples will help:
The Nuremberg Laws = enacted due to a purely emotional response (fear & anger mostly)
Amendment XIII to the U.S. Constitution = enacted due to the generally accepted belief that slavery was immoral (props to President Lincoln and all the abolitionist cohorts that PERSUADED the majority will of the people that this was true).

See the difference?

and we have a process to repeal laws or EO's that we feel are unconstitutional which is what happened with DACA and DAPA. Obama's goal was to provide some temporary relief and opportunity until the congress pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out how to legislate. I'd say he was pretty successful in accomplishing his goal.

LOL, what a laudable goal... let "the dreamers" stay for a few years, give 'em hope and then have that hope smashed on the rocks when someone finally got around to mounting a legal challenge to his unconstitutional usurpation of legislative authority. Like I said before, those taking up the cause of "the dreamers" should be angry with President Nimrod for not following through using proper Constitutional order, he had more than enough time to do so.

The dream act was tried through congress many times. Our useless congress kept loading it up with other immigration agenda items and it never passed.

Uh-huh because the President never made a convincing reason & evidence based case that it was the right thing to do from a social, economic and security standpoint, it's the President's job to do this and failing that the appropriate thing to do would have been to rescind his EO, however President Nimrod choose to leave it intact, which leads one to believe that his intention was to create a wedge issue to serve as a thorn in the side of his political opponents, which is what he's managed to accomplish.

Don't forget the Nimrod had control of both Houses of Congress for 2 years after his election and if this had REALLY been an issue that needed resolving he had both the time and opportunity to accomplish it via normal order, this only became an issue he "cared about" AFTER the Republicans took control of the House and thus it gave him the opportunity to make it a political one.

Nothing was being done so Obama took action and successfully gave these kids opportunity to work and seek an education. It appears now that Trump is going to lead an effort to solidify a law to protect them. I don't like the chaotic way it's being done by Trump but if it gets the right results Through his leadership then I will give him credit. Like it or not what Obama did was effective.

You still don't seem to understand the difference between acting based on emotion and acting based on reason, the legislative process that we have as messy and inefficient as it may be is the only way to achieve a triumph of reason over emotion, since debate and deliberation (i.e. weighing immediate and opportunity costs as well as social impact prior to making any decisions) is required to accomplish that objective. "Giving these kids the opportunity to work and seek an education" is not a justification for the Executive to usurp legislative authority, it's an appeal to sympathy by a would be autocrat, the case must be made based on economic and social criteria that both justifies the costs and mitigates any potential negative societal effects and then Constitutional order must be observed else the rule of law is undermined.

All that Obama accomplished was to turn "the dreamers" into political pawns while at the same time further dividing the citizenry and distracting the political machinery in Washington from FAR more urgent matters.

Its merely a wedge to attempt another amnesty scam and if people let this slide by they will once again regret it as the opportunities to get ahead dissipate even farther down the rabbit hole into the abyss.

 

[jc456]

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

but you don't, you don't care that american children are harmed by illegals. you lie like a fking rug.

I think if my children have to compete against other children that were brought here illegally a decade ago then they have to compete for the work. I don't think we need to cast them out of this country. Kind of a pussy move if you ask me.

no that isn't how it works. and it's a shame you care zip about american citizens. amazing. how do you live as an american with that bullshit in your head? I love my fellow americans. you = shit for brains.

I don't see the difference between two children that grew up here. A piece of paper is the only thing separating the two, other than that this country is home to both children. This isn't a huge number of people, why are you so scared of them? You can hate law breakers all you want but these kids didn't break laws, their parents did. So what does it come down to? Do you just not like Mexicans or Immigrants. Why are you so scared to compete against them?

funny how you wish to make shit up. one is here because they were born here and one is not born here. It is very simple. and Yes, that fking piece of paper is what we build countries from. Do you take a passport with you when you travel abroad? why? why not just walk in without that piece of paper. laugh my fking ass off at the joke and anti american you are.

 

[mudwhistle]

Treat them all the way Clinton treated them.

 

[jc456]

but you don't, you don't care that american children are harmed by illegals. you lie like a fking rug.

I think if my children have to compete against other children that were brought here illegally a decade ago then they have to compete for the work. I don't think we need to cast them out of this country. Kind of a pussy move if you ask me.

no that isn't how it works. and it's a shame you care zip about american citizens. amazing. how do you live as an american with that bullshit in your head? I love my fellow americans. you = shit for brains.

I don't see the difference between two children that grew up here. A piece of paper is the only thing separating the two, other than that this country is home to both children. This isn't a huge number of people, why are you so scared of them? You can hate law breakers all you want but these kids didn't break laws, their parents did. So what does it come down to? Do you just not like Mexicans or Immigrants. Why are you so scared to compete against them?

I know you don't. so you have no idea what it is to be a patriot. none at all.sorry, but your hate of US citizens is now well noted.

I love Americans... I also love what foreigner bring to our country... People from every country have amazing things to offer. I don't respect people who commit crimes and believe that there should be consequences, but we aren't talking about those people in this case now are we.

You're cheap little anti-american rants aren't landing. Try a different angle, you are sounding desperate. Try honest debate for a change

you hate US citizens. and an illegal brings zip into this country other than hurt to others who are citizens. look anti america queenie, you can banter with me all day everyday, and it ain't gonna change that you hate the US and its citizens. so perhaps you should go live in mehico since you love them so much. But leave my country traitor.

 

[Crixus]

You are correct that I didn't literally "read" your words back to you; I merely quoted them. As to having an honest conversation, what would YOU have advised the President to do? Continue to abide by an Executive Order that has been ruled Unconstitutional?

I already stated what I think he should have done. Proposed a clear immigration plan showing his support and intent to protect the "Dreamers" then challenge the Congress to legislate a bill. If he did that then he could go after the EO from a constitutionality standpoint or let the courts shut it down without all the confusion. The way he did it leaves 750,000 people fearing for their future. Its extremely careless and is only going to multiply the problems and feed division.

Any plan Trump might put forward (other than unconditional amnesty) would instantly be torn to pieces by the DemPress as inherently racist. What is so wrong with following the Constitutional provision that legislation originates in Congress?

You make assumptions, that means nothing and is no excuse to support inaction from Trump as far as providing a detailed plan... There is nothing wrong with using Congress to legislate, thats what should happen. DACA was never meant to be permanent law, it was a deferral to protect the "Dreamers" from deportation while congress figured out legislation.

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

Not an excuse. The people who came illegally are not my problem. Neither are their kids. Speaking of which, anyone know the avrage age of a dreamer?

 

[RodISHI]

I already stated what I think he should have done. Proposed a clear immigration plan showing his support and intent to protect the "Dreamers" then challenge the Congress to legislate a bill. If he did that then he could go after the EO from a constitutionality standpoint or let the courts shut it down without all the confusion. The way he did it leaves 750,000 people fearing for their future. Its extremely careless and is only going to multiply the problems and feed division.

Any plan Trump might put forward (other than unconditional amnesty) would instantly be torn to pieces by the DemPress as inherently racist. What is so wrong with following the Constitutional provision that legislation originates in Congress?

You make assumptions, that means nothing and is no excuse to support inaction from Trump as far as providing a detailed plan... There is nothing wrong with using Congress to legislate, thats what should happen. DACA was never meant to be permanent law, it was a deferral to protect the "Dreamers" from deportation while congress figured out legislation.

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

Not an excuse. The people who came illegally are not my problem. Neither are their kids. Speaking of which, anyone know the avrage age of a dreamer?

Over twenty years old. I'll find the link for you.

 

[Slyhunter]

With all of the different aspects regarding DACA and the fate of the dreamers, what should the priority be:

Americans first.
The needs of the Working Americans should supersede the needs of the immigrant illegal or legal.

 

[jc456]

With all of the different aspects regarding DACA and the fate of the dreamers, what should the priority be:

Americans first.
The needs of the Working Americans should supersede the needs of the immigrant illegal or legal.

just so you straighten yourself out an illegal alien is not an immigrant. they are two different things. so please stop using illegal in that context.

 

[Crixus]

Any plan Trump might put forward (other than unconditional amnesty) would instantly be torn to pieces by the DemPress as inherently racist. What is so wrong with following the Constitutional provision that legislation originates in Congress?

You make assumptions, that means nothing and is no excuse to support inaction from Trump as far as providing a detailed plan... There is nothing wrong with using Congress to legislate, thats what should happen. DACA was never meant to be permanent law, it was a deferral to protect the "Dreamers" from deportation while congress figured out legislation.

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

Not an excuse. The people who came illegally are not my problem. Neither are their kids. Speaking of which, anyone know the avrage age of a dreamer?

Over twenty years old. I'll find the link for you.

Over 20, under 30 is one I saw. And almost over a thousand have been revoked for criminal activity.

 

[jc456]

You make assumptions, that means nothing and is no excuse to support inaction from Trump as far as providing a detailed plan... There is nothing wrong with using Congress to legislate, thats what should happen. DACA was never meant to be permanent law, it was a deferral to protect the "Dreamers" from deportation while congress figured out legislation.

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

Not an excuse. The people who came illegally are not my problem. Neither are their kids. Speaking of which, anyone know the avrage age of a dreamer?

Over twenty years old. I'll find the link for you.

Over 20, under 30 is one I saw. And almost over a thousand have been revoked for criminal activity.

Bringing in MS-13 is what the entire program was for. Obummer wanted violence and death to americans.

 

[RodISHI]

Add five years on the totals in the stats and you will have the average age. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default...USCIS-DACA-Characteristics-Data-2014-7-10.pdf

 

[Crixus]

Add five years on the totals in the stats and you will have the average age. https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Humanitarian/Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals/USCIS-DACA-Characteristics-Data-2014-7-10.pdf

And all of a sudden there are 11,000,000 now? This is heading towards amnesty. Right out the gate every republican said as much when they said "we have to do something about their families ". Watch, amnesty is coming.

 

[RodISHI]

he just gave american children their country back. you illegal lover.

Ouch, you really got me there. Good one.
Excuse me for caring about PEOPLE. Especially innocent people who are being outcasted for no fault of their own.

Not an excuse. The people who came illegally are not my problem. Neither are their kids. Speaking of which, anyone know the avrage age of a dreamer?

Over twenty years old. I'll find the link for you.

Over 20, under 30 is one I saw. And almost over a thousand have been revoked for criminal activity.

Bringing in MS-13 is what the entire program was for. Obama wanted violence and death to americans.

Yup....and the other trash that mehico wants rid of. Heck they don't ensure the safety of their own citizens against thugs and their problems have grown substantially over the years because they have so many politicians willing to take payoffs. We don't need anymore for any reason.