24
   

Congratulations, House Republicans!

 
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 09:07 am
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/HorseD/2014/HorseD20141120_low.jpg

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/RogerR/2014/RogerR20141120_low.jpg

http://assets.amuniversal.com/87b32de051cb0132aef8005056a9545d.jpg

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/EaganT/2014/EaganT20141120_low.jpg

http://media.cagle.com/83/2014/11/19/156475_600.jpg
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 09:19 am
@bobsal u1553115,
How are jobs that build roads and bridges any different? Large jobs gains while the road is built but fewer people needed to maintain the road or bridge after the project is completed. So what is the difference? Hasn't Obama and the Dems been big supporters of construction projects over the last 6 years?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 11:04 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Your propagandists must not be Americans when they show the Speaker with a pipe wrench, not a monkey wrench.

That figures. Progressives do not know much about Americans.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 11:14 am
Quote:
Dem Talking Point Neutered: No Reagan or Bush Precedent for Obama's Imperial Amnesty EO

Quote:
1) Reagan and Bush acted in conjunction with Congress and in furtherance of a congressional purpose. In 1986, Congress passed a full-blown amnesty, the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, conferring residency rights on some 3 million people. Simpson-Mazzoli was sold as a “once and for all” solution to the illegal immigration problem: amnesty now, to be followed by strict enforcement in future. Precisely because of their ambition, the statute’s authors were confounded when their broad law generated some unanticipated hard cases.

The hardest were those in which some members of a single family qualified for amnesty, while others did not. Nobody wanted to deport the still-illegal husband of a newly legalized wife. Reagan’s (relatively small) and Bush’s (rather larger) executive actions tidied up these anomalies. Although Simpson-Mazzoli itself had been controversial, neither of these follow-ups was.

Executive action by President Obama, however, would follow not an act of Congress but a prior executive action of his own: his suspension of enforcement against so-called Dreamers in June 2012.


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/the-weak-argument-defending-executive-amnesty/382906/
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:21 pm
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/imgs/2014/141120-the-republican-dilemma-on-immigration.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:23 pm
http://i58.tinypic.com/ra6oth.jpg
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:25 pm
LOL!!!: Appropriations panel: Defunding immigration order "IMPOSSIBLE"
Republicans were really all-in on this idea that they could defund the order without shutting down the government. And now they've got like a day to figure out their next super-sneaky maneuver to ensure that Obama can't slow deportations. Or they can just keep insisting they can do the thing that's "impossible." Denying reality is a favored Republican strategy, after all.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/20/1346184/-Oops-GOP-s-plan-for-shutting-down-Obama-s-immigration-action-is-impossible


It would be “impossible" to defund President Obama’s executive actions on immigration through a government spending bill, the House Appropriations Committee said Thursday.

In a statement released by House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers's (R-Ky.) office hours before Obama's scheduled national address, the committee said the primary agency responsible for implementing Obama's actions is funded entirely by user fees.

.............

“This agency is entirely self-funded through the fees it collects on various immigration applications," the committee said in the statement, which was provided to The New York Times. "Congress does not appropriate funds for any of its operations, including the issuance of immigration status or work permits, with the exception of the ‘E-Verify’ program. Therefore, the appropriations process cannot be used to “defund” the agency."


.............

“We cannot, literally cannot, defund that agency in an appropriations bill because we don’t appropriate that agency. That agency is entirely fee funded,” Hing said.


http://thehill.com/policy/finance/224837-appropriations-panel-defunding-immigration-order-impossible#.VG4Q5YEHoiY.twitter
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:28 pm
http://afrocityblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/political-pictures-barack-obama-gay-vote1.jpg
parados
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:29 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Even if they did fund the agency, how would they defund it? When you take money away from an agency it can no longer do its job so defunding it would actually do more to allow illegal immigration than anything Obama can do.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:35 pm
@parados,
One can never know what these crazy GOP congressional members are willing to do to stop Obama from doing his job.

Don't forget; they're going to make him a one term president. Mr. Green
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:44 pm
@coldjoint,
There you go again, that sick perverted thing about other peoples sausages. Why don't you just wrap your eager little lips around one and get over it. Get out of your closet, its turned you into an asshole.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 20 Nov, 2014 08:46 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
There you go again,

Quote:
Top Gay Activist Charged With Child Rape (Major Democrat Donor)

Quote:
Terry Bean, the co-founder of the Human Rights Campaign, has been indicted on child rape charges in Oregon, Gotnews.com has learned.

Bean, 66, is a prominent Democratic fundraiser who has helped elect Democratic congressmen, senators, and even presidents. And now he’s accused of raping a 15-year-old boy.

The indictment charges Bean with two counts of third-degree sodomy, a felony, and one count of third-degree sex abuse, according to OregonLive.com.

http://gotnews.com/top-gay-activist-charged-child-rape-major-democrat-donor/
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 08:09 am
@cicerone imposter,
What part of granting the ability to stay in the US to illegal immigrants is part of Obama's job?

revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 09:26 am

Quote:
Now, Republicans will never admit it, but their man-turned-god, Ronald Reagan, was the first Republican president to take executive action on immigration to put a screeching halt to his party’s inhumane treatment of Hispanic immigrants. In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed the what would prove to be the last comprehensive immigration reform bill to pass Congress. The legislation, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) granted up to 3 million undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship if they had lived in America “continuously” since 1982, or four years; nearly identical to President Obama’s proposal for comprehensive immigration reform Ted Cruz will not let House Republicans debate or vote on.

There was a problem with the new immigration law that bothered Reagan’s conscience because it did not include spouses and children of the 3 million immigrants the law affected. At the time, the Senate Judiciary Committee said that the “families of legalized aliens would be required to “wait in line.” This abomination of “split-eligibility families” also wore on the consciences of the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) that drove them to condemn the separation of families that conflicted with Reagan’s so-called “pro-family” bona fides.

A year later some members of Congress offered up a legislative fix to include the now-legal immigrants’ family members in the IRCA, but it failed. So when Congress failed to do the humane thing and keep immigrant families intact, Ronald Reagan took it upon himself and changed the policy under executive authority, and “prosecutorial discretion” to extend the protections against deportations. Not surprisingly, there was no outrage, claims of presidential overreach, threats of impeachment, lawsuits against Reagan, government shutdowns, or summary elimination of his use of executive orders. Current Republicans are well-aware of Reagan’s executive action but it was a different story ‘then’ because that president was a white man.

source

[as just a disclaimer, I think the charges of racism is a distraction from the very real fact that this congress does everything in it's power to thwart the President and this is just more of the same. The president with the mid terms behind him, finally said enough. ]
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 09:42 am
@revelette2,
You do realize that what Reagan did was in concert with a law passed by Congress. The very article you are posting says as much. Obama has no such law to work off of and no law has been passed by the current Congress.
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 10:05 am
@Baldimo,
It's the President's job to decide how he will use resources to enforce immigration. Since Congress has not given him an unlimited budget he has to decide where he will enforce.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 10:06 am
@Baldimo,
Are you arguing that we can deport citizens? Because unless you are arguing that the law as written today breaks up families which is pretty much what Reagan's EO stopped.
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 10:18 am
Revelette, Parados...

...all that is going on here is Baldimo (read that: conservatives) trying to rationalize condemning actions by Barack Obama...

...that conservatives all but applauded when being done by their saint Ronald Reagan.

They are going to dress their nonsense in all sorts of pretty clothes....and put lots of lipstick on it...

...but in the end, it will still be what it is.

Nonsense.


https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSRlehtJww0jHsqXRHHzqsUsfYY73kRB7qwq-NDE9MA2mAB_vRSkg
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 10:20 am
@parados,
How do you figure I said this?
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 21 Nov, 2014 10:21 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
.all that is going on here is Baldimo (read that: conservatives) trying to rationalize condemning actions by Barack Obama...

...that conservatives all but applauded when being done by their saint Ronald Reagan.


The circumstances were different. And anyone who has raised a child sees a spoiled and spiteful nine year old running the country.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 6.68 seconds on 06/08/2025 at 07:12:40