Obama: Fund My Amnesty Or I’ll Shut Down The Government

I notice your posts are all just ad hom with no substance and reasoning as to why my post was incorrect. I assume you mean the 24 of the GOP Senate seats up in 2016 as opposed to 10 Democrats. There are 10 purple states of which I see three vulnerable for the GOP. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Illonois. Dems have 1 vulnerable seat which will be Nevada

Now here is the deal in the future either have some substance in your posts not just schoolyard ranting or you will be on my ignore list. I have a low tolerance for fools and trolls

 

He offers links to back up what he says, and you call him a troll? Wow.

 

Chuck Shumer wrote the damn bill in the Senate along with John McCain.
And Gilibrand won with over 72% of the vote in 2012.
Immigrants are one of the strongest constituencies in NY.
What are you smoking?

If you think Chuck Shumer will not support Obama, the senate bill and the EO -- you're beyond reason.

max

 

what would you call this?

no links, no reasoning explained. Just a lot of ad hom rants

 

Whatever.
Like you came to the table with anything.
I've been offering sources -- not opinion -- the whole way through.
Please... put me on your ignore list.
max

 

Then you have not been in this thread long. You might want to look back just a few pages before you put your foot in your mouth further.

 

Well you've claimed that Obama's executive orders are all legal even though they confer upon illegals (not citizens...but illegal aliens as you yourself have agreed) indefinite shielding from deportation although "prosecutorial discretion" is not intended to apply to tens of millions of law breakers en masse.

Elizabeth Price Foley in a New York Times op-ed prior to Obama’s speech

“While several presidents — both Republican and Democrat — have used prosecutorial discretion to temporarily delay deportation in the face of wars (Nicaragua, Kuwait), hurricanes or earthquakes (El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras) and other discrete natural and political catastrophes, no other president has claimed the constitutional authority to ignore immigration law because he believes it’s unfair as a matter of permanent national policy. At some point, the discretion not to prosecute a law becomes a failure to faithfully execute it. Whether President Obama’s immigration policies have crossed that line will be a matter for both courts and the American people to judge.

 

Yeah, only a list of the 2016 congressional seats.
You came to the table with this.

In light of the 2016 seats up for election -- which I posted -- your contention is opinion written in a vaccuum. Seriously...
Is there actually a substantative political discussion anywhere here?
You know, where people rationally talk through policy merits...
Because all I see here is unsubstantiated ideological opinions.
Look how this one started.
The OP doesn't even start with a premise based in reality.

max

 

not surprised you don't get it, I was referring to the post where he quoted then attacked me with no explanation as to what he found in error on my post

 

this is not just a list of Senate seats

I assume you mean the 24 of the GOP Senate seats up in 2016 as opposed to 10 Democrats. There are 10 purple states of which I see three vulnerable for the GOP. Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Illonois. Dems have 1 vulnerable seat which will be Nevada

please feel free to analyze the rest of the seats up for re election if you want and show me what I am missing if you can. But a quick look shows they are all solid red or blue. Do you have any original thoughts you would share with us on that, without just posting some regurgitation of a NC blog site?

 

Please look up the word indefinite and cross reference it with the stated term in the EO.
You will then realize why I know you are not dealing in reality.

If you start with reality, we could have a substantative debate over the merits of the policy.
But if you are just going to post made up stuff, it's not going to work out.

max

- - - Updated - - -

Correct, I should have written Congressional seats.
And the word solid is the point.
The contention is Dems wouldn't side with Obama.
This list indicates otherwise -- if we're talking from an understanding of political strategy.
max

 

I agree. There is a lot of ignorance in this thread. For one, there is no executive order.

 

Been real...
duty calls
max

 

you were referring to the Dems launching a filibuster earlier, I brought up cloture and the conversation deteriorated from there. Just in case you did not know there is no filibuster in the House. But even at that I don't think there are enough purple seats in the house to get nancy her big office back

 

Fair enough, you sound like a knowledgable and well informed fella, even though you shoot from the hip... Could you clear up something for me concerning Obamacare, please?

The Obama administration claims there's been over 8mln new policies sold over this year while it's also been established, around 6mln policyholders lost their policies due to Obamacare. So the question is, how many new subscribers should Obamacare claim?

For if you're unable to answer this simple question straight, you know what's the next question will be, don't you?

 

Oh, I see what you are doing...taking Obama at his word. Very wise...

I'm just calculating that a president that would publicly claim for years, over and over again, he didn't have the authority to grant deportation waivers to illegals, and then turn around and do just that very thing, would create an illegal program shielding illegals from deportation and then turn around and deport them anyway after granting them clemency to begin with.

If you persistently lie as a way of doing business only an idiot would think you could be trusted after that.

http://www.uscis.gov/immigrationaction

 

Links? Like www.whitehouse.gov... These links? Now, there's an nonpartisan and truthful source

 

and the same goes for the hundreds of republicans that won in the last 3 elections are they not also allowed to keep their campaign promises with out being demonized
the Public put the republicans in control all of congress as your messiah once said elections have consequences now go sit in the back of the bus

- - - Updated - - -

Budget bills cant be filibustered

 

So the party with minority control gets to be the party of no and if the party in majority control doesn't do what they want then the majority control party is to blame for any shut down?

Oh and that is not the way it has always been done, what is done when you have opposing houses of congress is both pass a bill and then it goes to reconciliation.

 

I realize that however budget bills will be just the tip of the iceberg of bills the progressive wing of the Dems are really just going to hate

 

all the GOP has to do is attach everything they want done or undone to a budget bill. it make congressional democrats non relevant and it will be Obama's signature that shuts down the government

 

It is an amnesty pure and simple........Obummer is forgiving criminals who entered this country illegally......and giving them employment cards and access to social services........what would you call it?

 

I didn't say he will not support Obama.

 

If you think back to what happened with his "red lines" when he wasn't insulated from having to make the decision there is a very good chance he will cave. The problem is Boehner is likely to cave long before that. If someone is going to make him blink it's going to have to be McConnell or the Republicans in the senate and house not following their leadership and forcing the issue.

 

The more I think about this the more I believe it's an opportunity Republicans shouldn't let go. It's a clear chance to take a stand on an issue. Immigration reform isn't even the issue here at all. The President shouldn't be coercing congress to sign the bill he wants in this way. They either give him exactly what he wants or he simply does it anyway and that isn't how the system is supposed to work.

It's not like Obamacare where the Republicans didn't have a leg to stand on as both congress and the President had passed it. In that case Obama was absolutely correct when he said they had to win an election to change it but the same rule applies to Democrats.