Donald Trump

PJ_Soul

Cancelling DACA is probably the most disgusting thing he's done as POTUS so far. That's saying a lot. I have faith that Congress will put a stop to this revolting bit of bullshit, but just the fact that he did it..... It's almost like he is just getting off on being a villain now.

Bentleyspop

President Obama's response to the decision by the current administration to eventually end DACA......

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.

But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.

Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people – our young people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.

That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?

Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.

It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.

Halifax2TheMax

Bentleyspop said:

President Obama's response to the decision by the current administration to eventually end DACA......

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.

But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.

Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people – our young people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.

That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?

Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.

It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.

Imagine if we had a president as articulate as that? Imagine if we had a president as thoughtful as this guy? Imagine that.

Kat

oratory

[awr-uh-tawr-ee, -tohr-ee, or-] 

noun

1.

skill or eloquence in public speaking:

2.

the art of public speaking, especially in a formal and eloquent manner.
...............
tweeting

noun

1.

a weak chirping sound, as of a young or small bird.

2.

Digital Technology. a message posted on the Twitter social media service and website: the message may include text, links, photos, or videos.

verb (used without object)

3.

to make a weak chirping sound.

4.

Digital Technology. to post a message on Twitter:

She tweets a lot about movies.

verb (used with object)

5.

Digital Technology. to post (a message) on Twitter for (people) to read:

mrussel1

Trump is certainly in a  DACA quandary on this one much of it his making, but not all.  Let's review the whole story, not just the Huff Post one.  
1. He foolishly campaigned on killing DACA to appease his base (his fault)
2. Several AG's have filed suit against the gov't for DACA as being Unconstitutional (not his fault)
3. I've read (without reading the merits) that most think that a court will rule DACA uncon., killing the program (not his fault).
4. While Obama or Clinton would defend the action, it would look pretty politically stupid for the Trump admin to defend something he campaigned against, and then LOSE the case (his own stupid fault for campaigning on it). 
5. He probably made the best decision considering the circumstances...
 - the AG's will likely drop the suit (without prejudice I'm sure)
 - Congress has six months to pass a proper law
I'm not sure Congress will get this done, but it's probably the best scenario since he really can't fight it in court.  

CM189191

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

tbergs

I'm not in total agreement with ending DACA, but I also find it hard to support a program that automatically gives a legal right to a by product of an illegal act. We do have laws in place and while Trump is his own worst enemy because of his track record with immigration, racism and any other negative relationship you can have with anyone not white, this would have been less of a target without all of his other abominable orders.

And yes, it is great to see a well written statement from a president. Eloquent and pretty words always make it easier to accept the decisions behind them, but they are not the whole story either. Of course Obama is only going to speak to the positives and great people in the DACA program. I would expect nothing less and believe that for the most part what he said is accurate. That still doesn't make it any more legal.

cincybearcat

Halifax2TheMax said:

Bentleyspop said:

President Obama's response to the decision by the current administration to eventually end DACA......

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.

But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.

Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people – our young people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.

That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?

Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.

It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.

Imagine if we had a president as articulate as that? Imagine if we had a president as thoughtful as this guy? Imagine that.

There has to be a balance between 140 characters and that way to long long piece that reeks of being a little to fond of hearing one's own thoughts?

Obama certainly has the gift.  Like Reagan.  And Slick Willy. 

I don't remember a former president getting as involved as Obama is.  I wonder if a normal republican would have been elected if he would have remained silent (meaning it's trump that is bringing this out) or if it's just who Obama intended to be after he left office.

jeffbr

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

well, I'm not a big fan of EOs regardless of which party's president is issuing them, and this is a good example of why. Obama certainly had good intentions. But now the gov't is being sued by multiple state AGs and as Mrussel said, there's a likelihood of it being overturned. In this case, in some really twisted way, it is probably a good thing that Trump is ending it the way he is - with the 6 month grace period for Congress to fix it. Much more humane than a court ordering the EO unconstitutional and wiping it out completely. Make no mistake, I'm a fan of what Obama was trying to do, and would love to see Congress create legislation that is humane and accomplishes what Obama set out to in his EO, but the EO wasn't the right way to do it. EOs are great until the other team starts issuing them.

tbergs

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Dirtie_Frank

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

By your definition so did Trump.  He did not like the EO so he rescinded the order.  Well within his power.  Now if this was a law created by congress and signed into law by Obama Trump would not have had the power to do what he did today.  That is all I am saying. 

PJ_Soul

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

I would 100% support something that is morally just and good for the country, like this particular EO of Obama's was. If Trump somehow managed to come up with an EO that was morally just and good for the USA, I would support that too (obviously that isn't going to happen, lol). There are good and bad executive orders, depending on the details. It's not hard to think grey when it comes to EOs.

tbergs

PJ_Soul said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

I would 100% support something that is morally just and good for the country, like this particular EO of Obama's was. If Trump somehow managed to come up with an EO that was morally just and good for the USA, I would support that too (obviously that isn't going to happen, lol). There are good and bad executive orders, depending on the details. It's not hard to think grey when it comes to EOs.

There is no doubt that Obama did this out of humane and moral sensibility, but that doesn't mean it's any more legal. If we start bending rules on this then where does it end? There are also people who think what Trump wanted to do with the travel ban was good and a way to protect our country even if you and I don't. It isn't our decision, but we can have a view and a voice in the outcome. There are plenty of good reasons to make DACA a permanent law, but until that is accomplished, the point is moot on whether to extend it while the lawsuits pile up.

I also don't have an issue with legal weed, driving with an open container or a lot of other laws, but until my state and the rest of the country gets on board, that doesn't make it ok in the places where it's still not legal. Do it the right way.

Go Beavers

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Don't leave out values and intentions of Obama vs. values and intentions of trump when discussing the legality issues. 

CM189191

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Obama presented a pathway, a solution, a way forward.  

What Trump did was not leadership, it was cowardly.  

mrussel1

CM189191 said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Obama presented a pathway, a solution, a way forward.  

What Trump did was not leadership, it was cowardly.  

He was in a box.  The delay was probably the only legitimate solution available to him.  At least Congress can attempt to do it properly now.  

tbergs

CM189191 said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Obama presented a pathway, a solution, a way forward.  

What Trump did was not leadership, it was cowardly.  

Yes, he did. This is why EO's are pure shit. They can be issued or ended for good or bad. Trump has merely shown us the bad which can come from them. Either way DACA needs to be resolved by congress, not by an EO.

CM189191

mrussel1 said:

CM189191 said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Obama presented a pathway, a solution, a way forward.  

What Trump did was not leadership, it was cowardly.  

He was in a box.  The delay was probably the only legitimate solution available to him.  At least Congress can attempt to do it properly now.  

wtf was stopping Congress from doing it properly back in 2012 when DACA was enacted?  Or prior to that?

Halifax2TheMax

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

Obama presented a pathway, a solution, a way forward.  

What Trump did was not leadership, it was cowardly.  

Yes, he did. This is why EO's are pure shit. They can be issued or ended for good or bad. Trump has merely shown us the bad which can come from them. Either way DACA needs to be resolved by congress, not by an EO.

EOs of and by themselves are not illegal. It's another check and balance with a power vested in the executive. It's up to the courts to decide whether the EO is legal in its context and applicability. Trump could have done nothing and let the lawsuits and counter suits play out. Nothing wrong with that, particularly  after and with the congress of no.
 

PJ_Soul

tbergs said:

PJ_Soul said:

tbergs said:

CM189191 said:

Dirtie_Frank said:

Kat said:

Do they mean it or is it just for public show?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/congress-daca-dreamers_us_59a9a57de4b0b5e530fe901b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

I honestly believe trump is cruel and evil. I'm not likening him to any previous historical figure though. He's in a horrible class of his own. :(

This is what happens when you legislate through EO.  No matter who you like or anyone likes as POTUS using a EO to create new laws is only as good as long as that person is POTUS.  Real reform has to come through Congress not the Executive Branch. 

Legislation has to come through Congress and the Executive Branch.  Obama did his part.  The obstructionist Republican Congress are the ones who shat the bed here. 

Obama over stepped his part when he didn't get what he wanted from the Republican congress. The same way Trump tried to over step his authority with the travel ban. Unfortunately, if you don't like getting "no" for an answer that doesn't mean you get to make up your own rules. You definitely wouldn't support it for Trump, so why so much leeway for Obama? Obama had good intentions, but that doesn't make it any more legitimate. Trump is merely falling back to rule of law.

I would 100% support something that is morally just and good for the country, like this particular EO of Obama's was. If Trump somehow managed to come up with an EO that was morally just and good for the USA, I would support that too (obviously that isn't going to happen, lol). There are good and bad executive orders, depending on the details. It's not hard to think grey when it comes to EOs.

There is no doubt that Obama did this out of humane and moral sensibility, but that doesn't mean it's any more legal. If we start bending rules on this then where does it end? There are also people who think what Trump wanted to do with the travel ban was good and a way to protect our country even if you and I don't. It isn't our decision, but we can have a view and a voice in the outcome. There are plenty of good reasons to make DACA a permanent law, but until that is accomplished, the point is moot on whether to extend it while the lawsuits pile up.

I also don't have an issue with legal weed, driving with an open container or a lot of other laws, but until my state and the rest of the country gets on board, that doesn't make it ok in the places where it's still not legal. Do it the right way.

But sometimes doing it the "right way" takes so long (or Congress just blocks literally everything, as was the case for most of what Obama wanted to do), that those at risk would suffer ... I think that would have been the case here. It was a good EO.