Obama bypasses Congress on DREAM Act, stops deporting young illegals

[Pheonixops]

Republicans NEVER pander for votes.

No need to pander when you can BUY BUY BUY!

Yeah, especially with dem dere LatInos, they would "never" do that!
nete
https://twitter.com/#!/rnclatinos
GOP Expands National Latino Effort | RNC: Republican National Committee | GOP

 

[Foxfyre]

Just out of curiosity, Obama is pushing for a top marginal tax rate of 39.6%.

How do you square that with Marxism, or, actually, "radical" Marxism?

.

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

Kinda tough to reconcile that with the fact that the last time this country was really humming was when the top marginal tax rate was 39.6%. Such a rate is not going to disempower (not sure that's a word) the rich, it just isn't.

This "sky is falling, the paranoids are out to get us" schtick isn't very intellectually honest.

.

You're drawing far more conclusions from my post than anything I said. The question is how pushing for a higher marginal tax rate of 39.6% squares with Marxism. I gave my point of view of how a higher marginal tax rate squares with Marxism.

That does not suppose that other forms of government would not also have high miarginal tax rates. But if you are going to ask the question related to Obama about whom I have very strong views re his Marxist leanings, and/or a question related to Marxism, you will get an answer that pertains to Marxism.

 

[Mac1958]

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

Kinda tough to reconcile that with the fact that the last time this country was really humming was when the top marginal tax rate was 39.6%. Such a rate is not going to disempower (not sure that's a word) the rich, it just isn't.

This "sky is falling, the paranoids are out to get us" schtick isn't very intellectually honest.

.

You're drawing far more conclusions from my post than anything I said. The question is how pushing for a higher marginal tax rate of 39.6% squares with Marxism. I gave my point of view of how a higher marginal tax rate squares with Marxism.

That does not suppose that other forms of government would not also have high miarginal tax rates. But if you are going to ask the question related to Obama who I have very strong views re his Marxist leanings, and/or a question related to Marxism, you will get an answer that pertains to Marxism.

Okay, let's use your words.

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

You appear to be saying that Obama's goal is to, your words, weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property.

So you're NOT saying that he would "weaken and disempower the rich" through the tax system, a 39.6% top marginal rate? If that's not what you're saying, and my question about the 39.6%, why did you say it?

And precisely what is Obama doing to confiscate all their property, or to "eventually" confiscate all their property? How are you thinking this would be accomplished, logistically?

These are your words, I'm just requesting clarification.

.

 

[Pheonixops]

presidential decrees are law, duh!

This one means Obama's buns are done.

He burned out the last shred of respectability he had with the American voters by giving away jobs to low bidders, and I bet the Unions are already in line with free how-to-screw-****** instructions for formerly illegal alien recruits.

He may have gained a million new voters, but he just lost himself ten million Americans who are going to be mad hatters at the polls, and he isn't going to make it through this time with that kind of backlash against his hovering vote schemas.

You don't speak for the American voters Becki. Congress can still act and pass the Dream Act. If they don't, there will be backlash alright. Continue to hate or do the right thing.

Rubio wants this to be permanent , you all should listen.

Next announcement will be : Obama/Rubio 2012. I would PAY to see that, just to see some people really have a spaz attack.

 

[P@triot]

Their strategy of the party of no is really coming unglued.

Damn PROUD to be the "party of no". See, "NO" is what grown ups say. When a small child (liberal) wants to play in the street, the adult says "NO". When a small child (liberal) wants to do something harmful, the adult says "NO".

See, small children have no conecept of right or wrong, dangerous or safe, irresponsible or responsible. All they know is that something has caught their attention and they want it. That's how the idiot liberal is. They have no concept of personal responsibility, they just want someone to provide healthcare for them so they don't have to work. They have no concept of fiscal responsibility, they just want money flowing through the streets from the US government.

"NO" is how you know who the responsible adults in the room are! Damn proud to be the part of "NO". Damn proud to be the ONLY adults in the room! By the way Sarah, Cuba is waiting for you any time you are ready. They've used your idiot left wing policies for the past 70 years now. Why don't you go see first hand how well that is working out for them....

 

[Foxfyre]

Kinda tough to reconcile that with the fact that the last time this country was really humming was when the top marginal tax rate was 39.6%. Such a rate is not going to disempower (not sure that's a word) the rich, it just isn't.

This "sky is falling, the paranoids are out to get us" schtick isn't very intellectually honest.

.

You're drawing far more conclusions from my post than anything I said. The question is how pushing for a higher marginal tax rate of 39.6% squares with Marxism. I gave my point of view of how a higher marginal tax rate squares with Marxism.

That does not suppose that other forms of government would not also have high miarginal tax rates. But if you are going to ask the question related to Obama who I have very strong views re his Marxist leanings, and/or a question related to Marxism, you will get an answer that pertains to Marxism.

Okay, let's use your words.

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

You appear to be saying that Obama's goal is to, your words, weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property.

So you're NOT saying that he would "weaken and disempower the rich" through the tax system, a 39.6% top marginal rate? If that's not what you're saying, and my question about the 39.6%, why did you say it?

And precisely what is Obama doing to confiscate all their property, or to "eventually" confiscate all their property? How are you thinking this would be accomplished, logistically?

These are your words, I'm just requesting clarification.

.

Let's start with that 39.6% top marginal rate. He has told us over and over that it is the rich who need to pay more, yes? Has he ever once suggested that the 50% of Americans who are paying little or nothing into the federal treasury need to pay more? No he has not. But he keeps hammering away at the rich and people like JoeB thrust their fists into the air and say "YES!!! The rich are evil." With the people behind him he receives little resistance.

Then when that milestone is reached what if he would declare the supremacy of unions which JoeB also wants and via executive order makes it almost impossible to do business with the government or any large corporations without being unionized? Another step necessary to take down the rich and concentrate the power even more. And then raise taxes more and rachet up more regulation etc.

All this is speculatiive yes, but it still addresses your question of how raising the marginal tax rate squares with Marxism.

And this very thread is about a President who is presuming to take more and more personal power. The last thing he did so far is to countermand the law of the land, a law passed by a duly elected Congress of our representatives, and make a brand new law all on his own.

If that doesn't chill the blood of every freedom loving American, I fear that the frog will be boiled before we finally wake up and say no more.

Which is what Marxism counts on in order to take over everything.

 

[P@triot]

Just out of curiosity, Obama is pushing for a top marginal tax rate of 39.6%.

How do you square that with Marxism, or, actually, "radical" Marxism?

.

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

Seriously?

no, honestly, you seriously believe that?

If there's hostility towards teh "rich" by the "less rich" it's because of their own behavior.

The behavior where you crash the entire economy, need a government bailout to survive, still insist on taking your bonus, and then sit on your cash instead of investing in jobs.

I don't need to be told anything, I see examples of it inmy life daily, thank you.

Hey Joe - I know you think running a business is so easy (even though you refuse to do it yourself), but allow me to let you in on a little secret. If you own a business, you are not going to "invest" in anything (people, assets, infrastructure, etc.) when the government is run by radical Marxists who demonize you 24x7 as "evil" and the cause of all problems, and who then implement anti-business policies like the Frank-Dodd Finance Reform bill and Obamacare. And let's not forget the endless threats to raise taxes on those "evil" business owners who create jobs.

If you want them to invest, then vote the idiot liberals the **** out of office and wake up to the realization that there isn't a poor person in America who has EVER hired one single person. Jobs come from the wealthy. Opportunity comes from the wealthy. No one on food stamps has ever hired anyone.

 

[Pheonixops]

Has he ever supported one of the GOP candidates? All I ever read from him, apart from his weird bigotry against Mormons, was his defense of everything Obama?

I've noticed the same phenomena. And I am really suspicious of somebody who claims to have been a Republican until. . . . .

It is legitimate to change parties. I've done so. I was a strong Democrat active in political campaigns and such as a young adult. But over the years the increasing liberalism of the Democratic Party made it less and less of a happy home for me and I could not rationalize away the harm I witnessed up close and personal in that. So I finally had to admit that my party had left me.

These days I'm not much happier with the Republicans, but at least I am allowed to be my conservative self in the Republican Party so I register Republican.

I have seen no conservative side to JoeB in any respect, so it is hard to believe that he has ever been a Republican.

Yes, and all those alleged Black callers to the Rush show yesterday claiming they won't be voting for Obama because of the announcement were so credible. The Teaparty haters have taken over your party and you conservatives have allowed it and you've lost support because of it.

LOL, it was probably Snerdly doing impersonations, after all he is the "official Obama translator" when he goes into that "Tom" ebonics rant for his pig boss limbaugh. Or maybe they are the 5 Black folks who will be dumb enough to side with pigs such as limbaugh, hannity, and the like.

 

[gallantwarrior]

So what's your objection. He's adopted your idea.

Or is this going to be another one of those "We Republicans were totally for that Until The Black Guy Did It" routines.

The objection is asswipe. he broke the law and deemed it done instead of allowing the Congessional Body of the United States do it as dictated by US Law.

Uh, no....

He's using his executive discretion as to where to put resources.

Which again, he's apparently allowed to do.

I'm not seeing what your problem here is, exactly.

Do you really think it's a good idea to take a person who was brought here illegally when he was 2, has been brought up as an American, had gone to school and gotten good grades, stayed out of trouble, and now works a respectable job, and deport him to a country he has no real connection with other than he was born there a long time ago.

Again, if it was a good idea when Marco suggested it, then it's a good idea when Obama is actually doing it.

If they're here illegally, and are working a "respectable job", then we should haul their employers into court and punish them for having hired an illegal in the first place. Now where's that "respectable job" again?

 

[Pheonixops]

So what's your objection. He's adopted your idea.

Or is this going to be another one of those "We Republicans were totally for that Until The Black Guy Did It" routines.

The objection is asswipe. he broke the law and deemed it done instead of allowing the Congessional Body of the United States do it as dictated by US Law.

which laws did he break?

Good luck in getting a credible answer. I asked the same question yesterday and only received a bunch of silly answers.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm suspecting that opposition to amnesty has won the day here. The pro amensty/pro Obama group is out of arguments defending that and are now focused on attacking Rush Limbaugh and Hannity. That's a pretty sure indication they're out of ammunition.

 

[gallantwarrior]

So what's your objection. He's adopted your idea.

Or is this going to be another one of those "We Republicans were totally for that Until The Black Guy Did It" routines.

If it had gone through Congress it would have been law. Now it's temporary, and can be thrown out as early as next January. Look at it as shooting yourself in the foot for a transparent political ploy. Cheap thrills, huh?

Actually, the president can do what he did under the current law. The ICE has the authority to grant work permits and visas to these minors. That this doesn't give them is a path to citizenship.

And, yeah, I guess the Weird Mormon Robot can throw these folks out in January for not being "White and Delightsome" like Mormon Scripture says, but he'd have a riot on his hands if he tried it.

besides, who'd do the lawns on his mansions.

"I can't have illegals here! I'm running for Office for pete's sake." - Mitt Romney.

Sorry, minority status ends at their eighteenth birthday.

 

[Pheonixops]

sure, why not?

If the military can turn a listless American teen into a hero then citizenship should be easy, it's just a matter of paperwork. Honorable military service deserves consideration as well as an exemplary record of education.

I led all 4 of my kids , 3 boys and 1 girl into military service. I believe it is important in the development of the citizen.

So did my Grandfather and my Dad, as well as myself.

 

[P@triot]

Sorry, I was a Republican until you dumbasses nominated Romney.

And a lot of sensible Republicans like George W. Bush and John McCain thought this was a good idea.

Finally, this guy is realizing you can't play nice with these jokers. He's finally hitting back. It's about ******* time.

So which GOP candidate did you support Joe?

Reagan both times. Bush-41 Both times. Bush-43 both times. Althought I gave serious thought to Perot in 1992. Even voted for McCain and Dole. Voted for Santorum in the primary.

But, two issues this year.

First, you guys nominated a member of a cult I consider pure evil. so you lost my vote this year.

Second, the GOP has had a bad habit of late of taking the side of the wealthy over the side of the working man. Didn't always used to be this way. At one time they made a serious effort to get the support of working people. Now the think they can just fool them with BS about guns and gays and abortions and they'll vote against their own economic interests.

Which apparently a lot of you do.

Take this issue. The real problem here is not mean old illegals waiving their scrotums at our immigrations laws. It's rich people who don't want to pay a working man a fair wage. But they'll get you all upset about them.

My favorite thing about you liberals Joe B. is the helpless "woe is me" pitty-party you all have for yourselves every 5 minutes. Guess what, the rich pay the "working man" exactly what he is worth. You command your own salary by your skill sets and the value you bring to an organization.

If you're not making the money you want Joe B., it's your own damn fault, because you're not of any value to the organization. You know why Alex Rodriquez could command a quarter of a billion dollars in free agency? Because his skill sets bring tremendous value to an organization. You know Steve Jobs made billions of dollars in his life? Because his skill sets brought tremendous value to every organization.

Obviously, you're way of thinking/working has not worked out too well for you in life as you hate the salary you make and have been laid off no less than 3 times. How about you just give my way a try? Instead of buying the liberal bullshit that just because you were born, you are entitled to a job and a huge salary (not to mention healthcare, housing, and on and on) - why don't you invest in yourself, increase your skill sets, and work your ass of on the job? I'll bet you'll see your salary go way up and your layoffs go way down.

But of course, it's much easier to just ***** and vote liberal than to actually improve yourself and work hard, right?

 

[EriktheRed]

Kinda tough to reconcile that with the fact that the last time this country was really humming was when the top marginal tax rate was 39.6%. Such a rate is not going to disempower (not sure that's a word) the rich, it just isn't.

This "sky is falling, the paranoids are out to get us" schtick isn't very intellectually honest.

.

You're drawing far more conclusions from my post than anything I said. The question is how pushing for a higher marginal tax rate of 39.6% squares with Marxism. I gave my point of view of how a higher marginal tax rate squares with Marxism.

That does not suppose that other forms of government would not also have high miarginal tax rates. But if you are going to ask the question related to Obama who I have very strong views re his Marxist leanings, and/or a question related to Marxism, you will get an answer that pertains to Marxism.

Okay, let's use your words.

One of the most fundamental tenets of Marxism is to weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property. And because the less rich people are told over and over and over how the rich are screwing them and cheating them and keeping them down, the Marxist gets plenty of support for the game plan. Once the worst has happened, it is too late to stop it.

You appear to be saying that Obama's goal is to, your words, weaken and disempower the rich and eventually confiscate all their property.

So you're NOT saying that he would "weaken and disempower the rich" through the tax system, a 39.6% top marginal rate? If that's not what you're saying, and my question about the 39.6%, why did you say it?

And precisely what is Obama doing to confiscate all their property, or to "eventually" confiscate all their property? How are you thinking this would be accomplished, logistically?

Short answer: he isn't.

 

[Pheonixops]

I'm suspecting that opposition to amnesty has won the day here. The pro amensty/pro Obama group is out of arguments defending that and are now focused on attacking Rush Limbaugh and Hannity. That's a pretty sure indication they're out of ammunition.

Since when is being accurate now an "attack"?

 

[Flopper]

Poor, Uneducated Immigrants tend to use a lot of Welfare, and state Aid Programs.

Just ask California how much they spend on Illegal Immigrants every year. Last year it was roughly the same as their Massive Deficit.

Based on estimates compiled by the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), the Immigration Policy Center reported that the $11.2 billion in taxes paid by illegal immigrants in 2010 included $8.4 billion in sales taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes and $1.2 billion in state personal income taxes.

"In spite of the fact that they lack legal status, these immigrants -- and their family members -- are adding value to the U.S. economy; not only as taxpayers, but as workers, consumers, and entrepreneurs as well," states the Immigration Policy Center in a press release.
Illegal Immigrants Pay Taxes – Illegal Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too, Says Immigration Policy Center

Yeah, I remember not to long ago that report was debunked. Illegals take several times more from the economy then they contribute. All of us paying taxes pay for them to be here and for them to receive many, many billions more in aid then they contribute to society. Illegals are a huge burden to our economy and have contributed to the decline in our citizens financial well being.

By who? These are estimates. There is no way to know how much value undocumented immigrants are taking from or adding to society because they are undocumented. We don't know if their 8 million, 10 million, or 20 million illegal immigrants. What passes for illegal immigrants to the causal observer, are often very poor Latinos who're US citizens are legal residents . The only way to get a clear picture of the problem is to document them. This policy will help do that.

We will never deport all the illegal immigrants in this country therefore we need policies and laws that lessen the negative impact on society. This policy helps the INS focus on those that are a real danger to society. Documenting hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants will help law enforcement identify and track criminals. The IRS will be better able to track those who aren't paying taxes and investigate tax fraud. Since these people will be documented, they will not need to turn to organized crime in order get documentation and jobs.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Flood the country? All of the young people who could possibly qualify for temporary work visas under this plan must, by definition, have arrived in this country prior to Obama taking office.

Aside from that fact, maybe you would like to stop and think for a moment. I know it's not easy for you, but try.

Obama is making this announcement in the aftermath of Jeb Bush stating that conservatives need to do a better job of reaching out to other groups while also needing to compromise or at least come up with workable solutions regarding immigration issues.

If there's ONE segment of immigrants who would (and should) be viewed with the least amount of hostility, it would have to be the young people who arrived here as minors, have never been in trouble, and are otherwise young people who would be considered model citizens if they were, in fact, citizens.

Now, if conservatives can't find it within their compassionate conservative hearts to view the most sympathetic subsection of illegal immigrants as worthy of temporary work visas, then how do you think Hispanic Americans are going to view conservatives and the GOP? Do you think they're seriously going to consider voting for your candidates when then perceive you as strident, and possibly even hostile to their concerns?

Hispanics are the fastest growing Demographic group in this country and are already in the majority in states like Texas. And what are conservatives doing? You're alienating them as a group.

By all means, please continue on that track! You're probably just falling into Obama's trap. You've got nobody else but yourselves to blame if and when Hispanics conclude that your party is hostile (or worse) to them and their interests.

oh for crying out loud, you are replying to ONE person, not ALL conservatives... and the people are upset with how Obama went about things. maybe you will hail him as some hero like the others are, but please give us a break about how supposedly ALL CONSERVATIVES are thinking and feeling.

It doesn't take all conservatives, or even MOST conservatives, to give Hispanics the impression that conservatives as a group AND the GOP as a party are hostile to them. All it will take is several well-known (or not so well-known) vocal conservatives who get on the airwaves to demonize Hispanics even if it's only in an effort to assail Obama and his policies.

All it takes is somebody like Rush Limbaugh, or any relatively small number of very outspoken conservatives with a radio show or a TV guest appearance, to get Hispanics to think that they're viewed with hostility by the GOP which already has a reputation for being the party of angry white males.

Sure, right...I can just see all those hispanics glued to their radios to hear Rush...

 

[Lakhota]

'I STARTED SHAKING': Young Immigrants React To Obama's Momentous Announcement

 

[gallantwarrior]

One needs to put it into basic ape terms for them....like:

Say there is a plague and a group of families came to together with their food and water to survive, but somehow Jose, Manuel and Raul got into their group and started eating the food of the group. The families have a choice to let the "illegals" to steal their food and water which causes some of the families to starve OR kick their ass out of the home so the families can keep the original intent of their group.

The illegal loving liberals here would change their minds if they were in a family above or maybe they would allow illegals to steal food and water from their family.....

With the real unemployment rate around 12% and Democraps catering to non-Americans to stay here to take jobs from Americans, it shows Democraps don't give a shit about the working American. Democraps put getting re-elected above YOU having a job.

very true, but their cult members hail them as heroes
I hope the voters take this and all the other divisions this administration has intentionally heaped on us to polls in November

Actually, they would find some way to make the family next door appear to be very mean and nasty because they wouldn't share their food and water, which would be forcibly taken from that family in order to feed the "poor, disadvantaged" Jose, Manuel and Raul, who failed to have the foresight to assemble their own food and water supply.