States sue to rein in Obama's illegal amnesty

[Care4all]

None of you nutters, whether anarcho commie like yourself bripat or a liberatarian or any group, get to say what are the definitions or the defy that law should work in ways for which it was passed.,

The EO is nothing like amnesty.

And the states have no standing sue over EOs about illegals. The cases will be summarily dismissed.

Who says states don't have standing? Either tell us or admit you just made it up.

you can't sue, unless you have been harmed...

this recent action has not harmed them...

These illegals are already living in these states, these illegals are already working, these illegals already have their children in our schools, the citizen children are also eligible for welfare, and as it stands now, because the parents work under the table and not above the table, they can easily hide what they make and allow their children to collect more in various welfare benefits than they may actually qualify for which costs these States more and the federal government more...

What this president did with this action did not harm the States, it actually will probably help them, by bringing these illegals in to the light of day.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

This lawsuit is nothing more than a handjob to those in the base who are too stupid to know it's bullshit.

Only Obama knee padders take that view. These are the same people who assured us cases against Obamacare were going nowhere. After all, "it was the law!"

No, it's just that some of us aren't crippled with Obama Derangement Syndrome, and also have a basic understanding of how the separation of powers works in our government. Just because I don't like Obama's actions does not make it unconstitutional.

If there was a seperation of powers, Obama wouldn't be taking it upon himself to use executive order to prevent deportation of those who violate Federal Immigration Laws that were once passed by the legislative branch and signed into law. He is purposely moving outside the Constitutional process, through an action not granted unto him under Article II regarding executive powers.

He is making sure that resources are devoted to the deportation of criminals, not babies, yet you complain about it.

That BHO is rightfully in the vein of RR in this matter was explained to you above; that you don't get it is your problem.

No, I just have a greater "respect" for those immigrants who must endure the long process of attaining citizenship LEGALLY, who don't like to see their efforts cheapened by those who have no respect for federal laws given exception through specialized treatment. The fact you don't understand this shows what little you know of the whole immigration process.

 

[S.J.]

No, it's just that some of us aren't crippled with Obama Derangement Syndrome, and also have a basic understanding of how the separation of powers works in our government. Just because I don't like Obama's actions does not make it unconstitutional.

Go ahead I can't wait for you to explain why Obama, a supposed Constitutional law professor said 20+ times that it would not be legal for him to do what he has now just done so have at it. Well?

I really don't give a shit, because unlike you ODS loons I realize that this is not about Obama. Those in the Republican party who are obsessed with making Obama look bad are wasting time, harming the country and the party all at the same time.

Obama's EO is legal. The correct and proper response from Congress and the GOP is LEGISLATIVE ACTION, not whiny bullshit panty wetting.

It sounds like you're saying that past Obama was wrong when he said he didn't have the authority to do it since laymen (that's you, for government school graduates) apparently know something that past Obama (who claimed to be a "constitutional scholar") did not. That leads me to question everything Obama has to say on the Constitution, if he got something so basic as that wrong.

This thread exposes liberals on this forum for the sycophants they are. They believed him when he repeatedly said he DID NOT have the authority to change the law. No one challenged him then. NOW they're defending him when he decides to do it anyway, even though he said it would be illegal. They don't have a mind of their own, he tells them what to think and what to do and they fall right in line, no matter HOW stupid it makes them look. If he came out tomorrow and again decided he didn't have the authority to grant amnesty, they would AGAIN change their minds too. Talk about blind allegiance, liberals are nothing more than puppets dangling on a string.

From what I have seen from the left the last few years they see nothing at all wrong with lying, dishonestly, hypocrisy, back stabbing and mocking their own. You can point this stuff out and they just shrug their shoulders.

And like Obama, they don't even try to hide what they're doing. They make ridiculous assertions that insult your intelligence, and claim they made a valid case in defense of their criminal president, KNOWING they look like mindless sheep.

 

[RKMBrown]

None of you nutters, whether anarcho commie like yourself bripat or a liberatarian or any group, get to say what are the definitions or the defy that law should work in ways for which it was passed.,

The EO is nothing like amnesty.

And the states have no standing sue over EOs about illegals. The cases will be summarily dismissed.

Who says states don't have standing? Either tell us or admit you just made it up.

you can't sue, unless you have been harmed...

this recent action has not harmed them...

These illegals are already living in these states, these illegals are already working, these illegals already have their children in our schools, the citizen children are also eligible for welfare, and as it stands now, because the parents work under the table and not above the table, they can easily hide what they make and allow their children to collect more in various welfare benefits than they may actually qualify for which costs these States more and the federal government more...

What this president did with this action did not harm the States, it actually will probably help them, by bringing these illegals in to the light of day.

Liar.

 

[gipper]

The Rs will not stop Obama's amnesty....the R leadership wants it as much as he does.
Yet another example proving they are not opposing parties.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This lawsuit is nothing more than a handjob to those in the base who are too stupid to know it's bullshit.

Only Obama knee padders take that view. These are the same people who assured us cases against Obamacare were going nowhere. After all, "it was the law!"

No, it's just that some of us aren't crippled with Obama Derangement Syndrome, and also have a basic understanding of how the separation of powers works in our government. Just because I don't like Obama's actions does not make it unconstitutional.

If there was a seperation of powers, Obama wouldn't be taking it upon himself to use executive order to prevent deportation of those who violate Federal Immigration Laws that were once passed by the legislative branch and signed into law. He is purposely moving outside the Constitutional process, through an action not granted unto him under Article II regarding executive powers.

He is making sure that resources are devoted to the deportation of criminals, not babies, yet you complain about it.

That BHO is rightfully in the vein of RR in this matter was explained to you above; that you don't get it is your problem.

No, I just have a greater "respect" for those immigrants who must endure the long process of attaining citizenship LEGALLY, who don't like to see their efforts cheapened by those who have no respect for federal laws given exception through specialized treatment. The fact you don't understand this shows what little you know of the whole immigration process.

You don't even respect yourself, bub. If you had been born in Mexico, you would have snuck across first chance.

 

[JakeStarkey]

None of you nutters, whether anarcho commie like yourself bripat or a liberatarian or any group, get to say what are the definitions or the defy that law should work in ways for which it was passed.,

The EO is nothing like amnesty.

And the states have no standing sue over EOs about illegals. The cases will be summarily dismissed.

Who says states don't have standing? Either tell us or admit you just made it up.

you can't sue, unless you have been harmed...

this recent action has not harmed them...

These illegals are already living in these states, these illegals are already working, these illegals already have their children in our schools, the citizen children are also eligible for welfare, and as it stands now, because the parents work under the table and not above the table, they can easily hide what they make and allow their children to collect more in various welfare benefits than they may actually qualify for which costs these States more and the federal government more...

What this president did with this action did not harm the States, it actually will probably help them, by bringing these illegals in to the light of day.

Liar.

All your lies, bub, does not detract an iota from the truth. You,son, are wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Gipper, yet you have given us nothing that any sane person would want in a party.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[BluesLegend]

Go ahead I can't wait for you to explain why Obama, a supposed Constitutional law professor said 20+ times that it would not be legal for him to do what he has now just done so have at it. Well?

I really don't give a shit, because unlike you ODS loons I realize that this is not about Obama. Those in the Republican party who are obsessed with making Obama look bad are wasting time, harming the country and the party all at the same time.

Obama's EO is legal. The correct and proper response from Congress and the GOP is LEGISLATIVE ACTION, not whiny bullshit panty wetting.

It sounds like you're saying that past Obama was wrong when he said he didn't have the authority to do it since laymen (that's you, for government school graduates) apparently know something that past Obama (who claimed to be a "constitutional scholar") did not. That leads me to question everything Obama has to say on the Constitution, if he got something so basic as that wrong.

This thread exposes liberals on this forum for the sycophants they are. They believed him when he repeatedly said he DID NOT have the authority to change the law. No one challenged him then. NOW they're defending him when he decides to do it anyway, even though he said it would be illegal. They don't have a mind of their own, he tells them what to think and what to do and they fall right in line, no matter HOW stupid it makes them look. If he came out tomorrow and again decided he didn't have the authority to grant amnesty, they would AGAIN change their minds too. Talk about blind allegiance, liberals are nothing more than puppets dangling on a string.

From what I have seen from the left the last few years they see nothing at all wrong with lying, dishonestly, hypocrisy, back stabbing and mocking their own. You can point this stuff out and they just shrug their shoulders.

And like Obama, they don't even try to hide what they're doing. They make ridiculous assertions that insult your intelligence, and claim they made a valid case in defense of their criminal president, KNOWING they look like mindless sheep.

Has anyone noticed that in the last few years many liberals have basically decided the law is meaningless if it gets in the way of their agenda? Even prominent Democrat legal scholars have expressed grave concerns over this behavior.

 

[JakeStarkey]

BluesLegend is describing the fascist state that the far right wants to create.

 

[Vigilante]

BluesLegend is describing the fascist state that the far right wants to create.

With each post you sound more and more like Bernie Sanders!

 

[RKMBrown]

I really don't give a shit, because unlike you ODS loons I realize that this is not about Obama. Those in the Republican party who are obsessed with making Obama look bad are wasting time, harming the country and the party all at the same time.

Obama's EO is legal. The correct and proper response from Congress and the GOP is LEGISLATIVE ACTION, not whiny bullshit panty wetting.

It sounds like you're saying that past Obama was wrong when he said he didn't have the authority to do it since laymen (that's you, for government school graduates) apparently know something that past Obama (who claimed to be a "constitutional scholar") did not. That leads me to question everything Obama has to say on the Constitution, if he got something so basic as that wrong.

This thread exposes liberals on this forum for the sycophants they are. They believed him when he repeatedly said he DID NOT have the authority to change the law. No one challenged him then. NOW they're defending him when he decides to do it anyway, even though he said it would be illegal. They don't have a mind of their own, he tells them what to think and what to do and they fall right in line, no matter HOW stupid it makes them look. If he came out tomorrow and again decided he didn't have the authority to grant amnesty, they would AGAIN change their minds too. Talk about blind allegiance, liberals are nothing more than puppets dangling on a string.

From what I have seen from the left the last few years they see nothing at all wrong with lying, dishonestly, hypocrisy, back stabbing and mocking their own. You can point this stuff out and they just shrug their shoulders.

And like Obama, they don't even try to hide what they're doing. They make ridiculous assertions that insult your intelligence, and claim they made a valid case in defense of their criminal president, KNOWING they look like mindless sheep.

Has anyone noticed that in the last few years many liberals have basically decided the law is meaningless if it gets in the way of their agenda? Even prominent Democrat legal scholars have expressed grave concerns over this behavior.

Last few years? It's been that way for a long time.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The growth of overweening national power is being pushed by both parties' progressive wings..

The dems are more socialist and the pubs more fascist.

 

[RKMBrown]

The growth of overweening national power is being pushed by both parties' progressive wings..

The dems are more socialist and the pubs more fascist.

Bull shit. Facists my ass.

 

[S.J.]

The growth of overweening national power is being pushed by both parties' progressive wings..

The dems are more socialist and the pubs more fascist.

You're not fooling anybody, libtard. We all know you're an Obama sycophant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am an American sycophant, and you? Simply a far right thug.

 

[S.J.]

I am an American sycophant, and you? Simply a far right thug.

No, you're not. You have presidential knee pads.

 

[Care4all]

None of you nutters, whether anarcho commie like yourself bripat or a liberatarian or any group, get to say what are the definitions or the defy that law should work in ways for which it was passed.,

The EO is nothing like amnesty.

And the states have no standing sue over EOs about illegals. The cases will be summarily dismissed.

Who says states don't have standing? Either tell us or admit you just made it up.

you can't sue, unless you have been harmed...

this recent action has not harmed them...

These illegals are already living in these states, these illegals are already working, these illegals already have their children in our schools, the citizen children are also eligible for welfare, and as it stands now, because the parents work under the table and not above the table, they can easily hide what they make and allow their children to collect more in various welfare benefits than they may actually qualify for which costs these States more and the federal government more...

What this president did with this action did not harm the States, it actually will probably help them, by bringing these illegals in to the light of day.

Liar.

Seriously RKM? That's the depth of your debating ability on a political debate message board?

What is it that you think is a lie?
Why do you believe it is a lie?
What facts do you have that supports whatever it is that you think is a lie, as a lie?

Present your thoughts, present your case, argue the argument, I am willing to listen, without having to resort to calling you a liar, as you did me or a bitch as SJ called me....

Gosh, are you guys just thoughtless zombies or some kind of inanimate thing that can only take your marching orders from your beloved media and unable to debate the issue on a personal level with your own thoughts from your own research, in a one on one conversation with another human being that took the time to research, then come to her own conclusions based on that research?

I think I laid out a pretty good case! Now tell me WHY I am wrong...isn't that how it is suppose to work? NOT JUST liar, or bitch....sheesh.



or am I just suppose to be clairvoyant?

 

[BluesLegend]

BluesLegend is describing the fascist state that the far right wants to create.

LOL that's just crazy talk.