His Majesty…King Obama, Does End-Run Around Congress And Enacts Dream Act Himself

Loading

How wonderful it must be to be King eh?

Our Royal Highness, The King of the United States of America, has decided himself to bypass Congress and issue a executive order stopping all deportation of those here illegally, not all here illegally but only those who were brought here as children. It’s not formal legalization, it’s de facto legalization.

Obama once said that he didn't have the power to do this:

THE PRESIDENT: I just have to continue to say this notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We are doing everything we can administratively. But the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there’s been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It’s just not true…

[W]e live in a democracy. You have to pass bills through the legislature, and then I can sign it. And if all the attention is focused away from the legislative process, then that is going to lead to a constant dead-end. We have to recognize how the system works, and then apply pressure to those places where votes can be gotten and, ultimately, we can get this thing solved. And nobody will be a stronger advocate for making that happen than me.

But now His Majesty decides he no longer has to enforce those laws on the books.

Why?

Well, he needs votes since he seems to be getting creamed at the polls.

Laws? Eh…who needs em. Congress? Eh…they can get bent.

He will rule what must be done, when it must be done, and how it must be done.

John Yoo, who knows just a bit about Executive Branch authority, says he is out of bounds:

Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it. President Obama cannot refuse to carry out a congressional statute simply because he thinks it advances the wrong policy. To do so violates the very core of his constitutional duties.

There are two exceptions, neither of which applies here. The first is that “the Laws” includes the Constitution. The president can and should refuse to execute congressional statutes that violate the Constitution, because the Constitution is the highest form of law. We in the Bush administration argued that the president could refuse to execute laws that infringed on the executive’s constitutional powers, particularly when it came to national security — otherwise, a Congress that had a different view of foreign policy could order the military to refuse to carry out the president’s orders as Commander-in-Chief, for example. When presidents such as Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, and FDR said that they would not enforce a law, they did so when the law violated their executive powers under the Constitution or the individual rights of citizens.

So where will this kind of power play lead in the future? You know, once Obama is gone and future Republican and Democrat Presidents sit in the oval office:

…Imagine the precedent this claim would create. President Romney could lower tax rates simply by saying he will not use enforcement resources to prosecute anyone who refuses to pay capital-gains tax. He could repeal Obamacare simply by refusing to fine or prosecute anyone who violates it.

So what we have here is a president who is refusing to carry out federal law simply because he disagrees with Congress’s policy choices. That is an exercise of executive power that even the most stalwart defenders of an energetic executive — not to mention the Framers — cannot support.

Do the Democrats really want to go down this road? Do they really believe they will have the White House for the rest of eternity?

No, a Republican will get into the White House and under the precedent set by His Majesty rule what he wants to enforce and when.

This is a slippery slope that neither side should accept.

Exit video

[flv]http://videos.videopress.com/sr3nGK2g/krauthammer_obama_immigration_outandoutlawlessness_dvd.mp4[/flv]

jfdghjhthit45
0 0 votes
Article Rating
47 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Next thing you know, obama will be pardoning Eric the Holder, or am I getting ahead of things?

I’ve changed my mind about amnesty.

It’s all about fairness.

Consider: A man who only wanted a share of the American dream ignored a law. But his children are blameless. So why shouldn’t they be allowed to remain in the home their father provided for them through years of hard work? And why should they have to surrender the only life they’ve ever known?

After all, the children have gone to college and are working at becoming contributing citizens and good Americans. Can’t we all find a place in our hearts to forgive them and accept them, rather than condemn them for something they had no say in? Should the children be punished for the crimes of their father?

Amnesty isn’t a popular term, but sometimes it’s the right thing to do.

So it’s agreed: Bernie Madoff’s children should be allowed to keep their father’s money. Because it makes just as much sense as amnesty for illegal aliens.

It’s not the amnesty that bothers me (although it does) it’s the blatant illegalality of his decision. How much longer do we sit still for this lawless pos. We have no kings in a democracy.

Louis XIV stated ” L’etat, c’est moi “. The State is me.

Your affirmative action precedent is destroying your country.

Children born in the US to illegal aliens should go back to the country of their parents origin until they(the parents) can come back legally or until that child turns 18 at which time he/she can decide which country he/she belongs to or possibly can apply for dual citizenship. I was born in England, my parents were Americans. At 18, I signed papers which denied citizenship to England. My parents were there legally, so I guess that doesn’t count, ehh?

When is someone going to do something to stop this dictatorship? I fear this is only the beginning the closer the election gets

[Obama] has decided himself to bypass Congress and issue a executive order….

Uh no. Obama has NOT issued an Executive Order for this. He has announced policy shifts that will be effected through DHS.

Constitutional? Unconstitutional? I don’t know. But NO Executive Order is involved.

Does the list of illegal immigrants and all their personal information and identifying photograph get magically deleted after Obama leaves office?
Or does it continue to exist with the possibility of being used for other purposes besides issuing work permits?

Curt–

You might want to embed Obama’s 2011 statement on this at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9isifcg9ik&feature=player_embedded

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order — that’s just not the case. Because there are laws on the books, that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the laws. The Executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement the laws, and then the Judiciary has to interpret the laws. There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system, that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

” The 14th Amendment states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States-” Children of non-citizens are only granted citizenship if they are SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF; if the parents of the child are here illegally they are not under the jurisdiction of the USA and their child, being under their authority, is also not under the jurisdiction of the USA and therefore not a Citizen. Of course in reality illegals claim the benefits and rights of citizenship while staying outside of the performance of citizenship along with its responsibilities and duties. Part of the Naturalization process clears up any confusion as to what jurisdiction the new citizen is under; without that clarification the non-citizen continues to reap the benefits of American Society while avoiding the duties (like TAXES for example).

Curt and friends: OBAMA DID NOT ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER.

This is important to keep in mind when evaluating the legality of the changes in DHS immigration enforcement priorities that Obama has outlined.

“If I’m elected president, we’ll do our best to have the long-term solution.”

Any specifics, Mr. Romney?

What Obama has side-stepped are legislators who have gone years without legislating anything in the way of a long-term solution. They can try to remedy that anytime they want to. Meanwhile they should take note that we have a President who isn’t afraid to act within the limits of his authority.

An executive order? yeah well lets see: he ordered Homeland security not to deport illegals. how much different from “and executive order” is there? It’s an illegal act by a pos president plain and simple. You remember that!

This will just invite more voter fraud. If they think they’re gonna be citizens in the near future, why not try to vote as well?

@jainphx:

There has been no illegal act. There’s nothing illegal about it at all.

@jainphx. I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one on blogs. All I’m saying is that Obama did not issue an Executive Order, Proclamation, or Memoranda regarding this. This will affect the legal strategies of those who are going to challenge this in court.

Let him keep playing his little political games. His approval/disapproval in the latest Rasmussen poll dropped to 46/53 since he pulled this stunt. Gallup isn’t much better. The national security leaks may have something to do with it as well.

THERE ARE DANGEROUS DUDE IN THE WHITE HOUSE,
EVERY ONE KNOW THAT HE WILL DO ANYTHING TO GET RE-ELECTED,
ANYTHING, IT MEAN A LOT OF THINGS, TO DESTROY AMERICA,
I hope the LATINO DON’T BELIEVE HIM, BECAUSE THEY WONT GET MORE THAN THEY GOT, THAT IS ZERO IN A NICE PACKAGE OF PROMISSES, BECAUSE YOU ALL ARE NOT BLACK
DON’T LISTEN TO HIS BULL

@ilovebeeswarzone: People are becoming more and more aware of his game. Hopefully Hispanics will see that they are being used as a means to an end.

BREITBART, HAD TAPES, VERY damaging to OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION hopes,
because it shows OBAMA FRATERNIZING WITH WEATHER UNDERGROUND TERRORISTS
WHOSE GOAL was to set up a COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES ”
REPORTS PAUL JOSEPH WATSON OF infowars.com
BREITBART HAD ANNOUNCED PLANS TO RELEASE VIDEOTAPES THAT would destroy
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA’S CHANCES OF BEING RE-ELECTED.
THE TAPES WILL ALSO reportedly expose the PRESIDENT AS A CHAMPION
OF ” racial division and class warfare ” said BREITBART.
ALSO, in at least one video, HARVARD STUDENT OBAMA REPORTEDLY HOPNOBS
WITH MEMBERS of 60’s radicals, left-wing groups some of which where linked to anti- government
VIOLENCE, including BOMBINGS
HIS SITE PRESENTED A 60 minutes-style expose that led to the shutdown of the FEDERALLY FUNDED
GRASSROOTS GROUP ACCORN, aka ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
FOR REFORM NOW. HIS SITE VIDEO SHOW THE GROUP’S WORKERS SUPPORTING ILLEGAL SHEMES,
the misuse of FEDERAL FUNDS AND TRAFFICKING IN CHILDREN,
THE 43 YEARS OLD INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST DIED ON MARCH I, LAST YEAR,
he collapse from an apparent heart attack while walking near his home in LOS ANGELES,
BUT MANY OF HIS ENTOURAGE BELIEVE THERE WAS FOUL PLAY STILL IS IN INVESTIGATION.
THOSE ARE SUPPOSE TO BE RELEASE BEFORE
THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

another vet
hi, yes and after the GEORGE ZIMMERMAN STORY I think they have the message and can see who are on their sides, it’s evident now. with that case.
bye

CURT
HI,
I’m watching a show on TV about fisherman on high sea capturing a huge BLACK MARLIN, GUESS WHAT
THEY CALL THOSE HIS MAJESTY,
AND THE 600 POUND MARLIN COMING CLOSE TO THE BOAT LIKE A PLEASURE BOAT,
JUMP IN THE BOAT WITH HIS LONG SPEAR HITTING THE FACE OF THE YOUNG SON OF THE CAPTAIN,
WHICH HAS MANY BRUISES ON HIS FACE IN HIS THROAT, HE RECOVER IN 2 YEARS,
AND GO BACK WITH HIS FATHER TO FISH THE HIS MAJESTY THE BLACK MARLIN

CURT
OH MY GOD, THEY CAUGHT A SHARK, HE COME AND BREAK THE BOAT FROM UNDER
RIPPING A FEW PIECES, FREAKING UP THE FISHERMAN,
OUF THAT WAS SOMETHING TO WATCH.
I CAN SEE YOU VACATIONING IN THERE, IT IS A SRESS BREAKER USING ANOTHER STRESS. A 600 POUND SHARK CALLED A MECO SHARK
BYE

You mean you believe it to be right for a child or young adult who was brought to this country in their youth by his or her parents, before the age of consent, should be torn from their family if caught as an unauthorized alien, and be deported to a land that is completely foreign to them? Even Reagan was pro-amnesty—an this edict isn’t even that liberal.

There’s such a thing as decent human treatment—regardless of laws—but I doubt that John Woo would know anything about this. (And I doubt if ultra-conservatives would either.)

Liberal 1 [objectivity]
the laws of the land must be followed by all CITIZENS OF AMERICA,
AND THE PRESIDENT IS NOT IMMUNE FROM THE LAW, HE HAS TO FOLLOW ,
even if he want votes from the LATINOS, HE WILL PROMISED ANYTHING,
BUT THE CONGRESS AND THE SENATE ARE THE PLAYERS IN KEEPING THE LAW SAFE FOR AMERICA.
THE PRESIDENT HAS TO OBEY THE LAW, otherwise he is telling the people specially the young, that they can get away with breaking the law and commit crimes,
and many are doing it now because they get away with it,
by example from leadership.

@Jason:

There has been no illegal act. There’s nothing illegal about it at all.

Ah, I see we’re dealing with yet another product of the public school system here. Let me introduce you to a document you’ve probably never heard of, let alone read: The U.S. Constitution.

Article 1, Section 8:

“The Congress shall have Power…To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…”

Article 4, Section 4:

“The United States…shall protect each of them [the States] against Invasion…”

@John Cooper:

I will repeat: There has been no illegal act. No matter how badly the right wants to believe otherwise, and would like to convince people otherwise, nothing illegal has been done.

If some specific law had been broken by the President, republicans would be citing it instead of just bitching, moaning, whining, and making vague accusations.

That’s the same republican majority that has worked up no long term solution themselves. Nobody has been stopping them from writing and putting forward legislation.

Also whining is Mitt, who offers nothing specific. About anything. Ever. Specifics? As a candidate, the guy is a cypher. A total blank, for the hopeful to fill in with whatever they would like to believe. He proposes nothing specific so no one can attack him on it.

That’s what you’ve got. Irrational hatred for Obama and a total blank as the alternative.

Public school system? You all rely on voters who can’t think. People who can look at Romney and think the guy is actually saying something.

That’s right, Jason. Keep repeating “There has been no illegal act” over and over and that will make it so. You libs crack me up.

Jason
SO YOU’RE NOT A CONSERVATIVE, AS YOU TRIED TO CONVINCE HERE WHY
YOU WOULDN’T VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY,
OF COURSE YOU WON’T VOTE FOR HIM, YOU ARE FROM THE OTHER SIDE,
so stop giving lies about MITT ROMNEY, HE SURE IS WAY ABOVE OBAMA ABLE TO FIX THINGS,
NOT SCREW UP THINGS UP LIKE OBAMA BEEN DOING,

There has been no illegal act. If there has been, specifically what law has been broken? A real law, not something imagined to exist by Rush Limbaugh. The right should put up or shut up. They shouldn’t be allowed to impose their delusional thinking on the rest of the country. It’s high time that every crazy statement they make be openly challenged.

@Jason:

Ooops, you’re wrong. The Constitution states:

Article II, Section I:

Before he enter on the Execution of His Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: — “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Apply Article I, Section 8, which Obama has just declared he will not honor and will thwart the authority of the co-equal branch of government, the United States Congress, enacting policy not under his purview. Only Congress can impliment immigration policy, not the President.

Why is it liberals like you never seem to understand the words of the Constitution?

@retire05, #31:

Why is it liberals like you never seem to understand the words of the Constitution?

Maybe conservatives should have taken the matter of Unitary Executive Theory a lot more seriously when people tried to bring it up during the previous administration. In case someone missed it, a new precedent for expanded Executive Office power was being set. Over eight years after the horse got out, republicans are suddenly noticing that they left the barn door standing open.

@Greg:

A President has the responsibility to honor no law that is unconstitutional. The laws governing immigration are designed by the Congress, and that is one law no president can usurp. Obama, the Constitutional lecturer, seems to think differently.

So let me see if I understand you correctly; you are saying that you think President George W. Bush usurped the Constitution so Obama should be able to do the same thing? Typical liberal thinking that two wrongs make a right. Or is it that liberals only know how to say “Neener, neener, neener?”

@retire05:, #33:

As Chief Executive, President Obama can alter enforcement practices without changing a law itself. This strikes me as a reasonable way for the Executive Branch to respond to a Legislative Branch that has totally failed to come up with any long-term solutions. Young undocumented aliens who have been here most of their lives because of what their parents did can’t just put their lives on hold forever waiting for Congress to act.

It’s also a very deft political move on Obama’s part. He’s called the opposition’s bluff. If they want that long-term solution they’re always referring to, then they need to propose one. With their House majority there’s nothing preventing them from putting together a bill and bringing it to a vote. There’s been nothing preventing them since the 2010 election. Except for the fact that they don’t really have a comprehensive, long-term solution.

@Greg:

You’re wrong again. A president cannot refuse to uphold law that has already been enacted and deemed Constitutional. It is a Constitutional guarantee that the Congress, not the President, determines immigration law. If Obama wanted to challenge it, he needs to do so in court.

Obama’s position is as the highest law enforcement officer in the nation. He is bond, Constitutionally, to uphold the laws as duly passed by Congress.

As to calling the opposition’s bluff, you may think that is what he did, but I can assure you that those who have jumped through all the hoops and waited for years to enter this nation legally, and who are now citizens, are not going to view Obama’s armchair amnesty with favor. And they vote in greater numbers than natural born citizens.

Here is a long term solution that you seem to desire: close our borders and adopt Mexico’s policy of handling illegal immigrants without the violence often foisted on illegals in Mexico. One and done.

Seems that protecting our borders is not high on Obama’s priority list. And now he has the entire Border Patrol speaking out against him. You may think that is a winning move, but it ain’t.

Seems that protecting our borders is not high on Obama’s priority list.

The Obama administration had deported nearly as many illegal aliens by the end of 2011 as were deported during the entire 8 years of the Bush administration. The Obama administration has also been more selective, deporting criminals before undocumented college students, for example.

Republicans can complain about Obama’s immigration policy all they want. I appreciate results.

BTW, Illegal border crossings into the United States are currently at the lowest level in 40 years.

And now he has the entire Border Patrol speaking out against him.

The National Border Patrol Council is a public employee labor union affiliated with the American Federation of Government Employees and the AFL-CIO. For what reasons might they oppose amnesty toward a large class of undocumented aliens? The union also opposed prosecutorial discretion. If you’re deporting 100 undocumented aliens, why would anyone not prefer that they be 100 criminals, rather than a random assortment of undocumented gardeners, housekeepers, and college students?

Usually the right seems inclined to think that union interests probably aren’t identical with national interests. This seems to be the exception.

The run “no illegal act” is a misnomer in terms. The issue is Acts of Malfeasance and Usurptation of Principal. Reading or watching the Ray Bradbury, never a college degree, screenplay adaptation depicts Ahab “Ahab is Ahab” as a principle character that committed no crime and could not be judged as committing an “illegal act” in his drunken (crack, pot, cocaine addled) pursuit after that great Whale.

Greg, no statistical proof for remarks, then Jason, flunk out lawyer and management theorist, and Liberal1, rejected George Soros job applicant, are just a bunch of croaking frogs at the lily pond weary of the hawks and eagles ready to swoop down to their level for a cheap meal.

THE SOOTHSAYER,
I like your comment as always.
you put few words which mean so many pages
bye

GREG
HE DEPORT THEM AND THEY COME RIGHT BACK THRU THE OPEN BORDERS,
IS THAT A GAME OBAMA WANT THE LATINOS TO KNOW?

As King Obama loves to remind everyone who disagrees with him…”Elections have consequences.”
Well, entering our country illegally has consequences, too. They should have thought about those consequences before they broke the law and then brought innocent children into their illegal world. Where is their responsibility in all of this?

Let the parents explain to their innocent children what they did to them and the situation they created by their blatant disregard for laws. Then they have the audacity (Obama’s word) to demand that we educate their children, give them free health care in our emergency rooms, just simply overload our systems. And who pays for this? The “innocent” legal citizens who pay their taxes.

I’m sick to death of their outreached hands and pleas for mercy. What do you think would happen to me if I tried to illegally immigrate into France or Germany or China? Pick your country?

I just finished teaching a kindergarten class this year that was half Hispanic, and I live in the middle of Indiana in a small city that has manufacturing jobs! Imagine that! But these jobs are being scooped up by all of these Hispanics, and we are not allowed to ask for proof of citizenship. But I have to learn to speak Spanish!!! They come here and expect me to learn their language!!! I can’t even hold a parent conference without an interpreter. And I have to hold them at night because they cannot get off work. Every communication or piece of homework must be provided twice – in English and in Spanish. And they keep having more kids – one every year.

If they are so worried about their children being deported, then they should quit giving birth to children in this country if they are here illegally. Hold them responsible for what happens to their children. They did it. They broke the law. Not me.

Fed Up Teacher
you make more sense than OBAMA AND HIS DEMOCRATES
IF WE ONLY COULD SWITCH YOU IN HIS PLACE, AND GET RID OF HIM,
IT WOULD BE AN GREAT ACHIEVEMENT FOR AMERICA.
BEST TO YOU

If you have not seen the new DVD entitled “Dreams from My Real Father,” you must spend the $15 and get it. Then get every relative, friends, or neighbor to watch it, too. It finally uncovers and explains why Obama has made his entire background so secretive – spent millions to lock it all away. The question about his birth certificate is all wrongheaded. The question is not where he was born…but who was his father? It was not that guy from Kenya. Try Frank Marshall Davis. If you don’t know anything about “Frank” – do a Google search and also go to the website http://obamasrealfather.com/ or just do a search on YouTube. You’ll do what thousands of us are now doing….saying “Now, I understand it all.” His birth certificate doesn’t show a father. It says “Father Unknown”. The video is astounding and two years in the making. The research is phenomenal. I’m a serious person who saw through Obama when he campaigned against Hillary. All I could think at the time was that the masses were like the mice in the Pied Piper story. Obama played his flute and they all blindly followed him. He has one mission in life: to fulfill the dreams of his REAL father. The well-known communist, Frank Marshall Davis. And do people realize his maternal grandparents were not only communist but worked for the CIA? And Axelrod was a red-diaper baby, too. I can’t look at Obama now and not see the face of Frank Marshall Davis. The older he gets, the more he looks just like him. Not that poor black guy from Kenya who was paid by Obama’s grandfather to marry his daughter and give his grandchild legitimacy. Frank couldn’t marry her; he was already married to a white socialite from Chicago. And the video explains all of the relationships with Bill Ayres, Rev. Wright, and how he got a passport to visit Pakistan, and how he climbed the Chicago political system and got into Harvard, etc. etc. Watch and learn. You’ll finally get it. Obama’s little house of cards is crumbling around him, and he’s scared to death. When people get scared, look out. I think this fall will be a stunning display of a man crumbling or one who will stoop to anything to try and get re-elected. I worry for Romney.

Fed Up Teacher
wow, this will make a big impact, I hope,
thank you
bye

If he has deported so many, it’s because so many more have come into the country illegally during Obama’s reign. And this man is a pure political animal who only knows dirty Chicago style politics. Romney is a very smart man, but I wonder if anyone can survive a full out election war with a man like Obama who is so willing to do whatever it costs to stay in power. Morals? He has none. Scruples? Even less. Intelligence? The guy couldn’t do any more than a C average in college and high school, and he never wrote one single article as the heralded president of the Harvard Law Review. He can’t write. William Ayers wrote his book for him. He can’t give a speech unless it’s on the teleprompter. Ever listen to all of us “uhs” and “uhms” and fumbling for words when he has to speak extemporaneously? I’ll never forget “corpsman” – unbelievable. Anyway, I digress. His goal is to eliminate the middle class. If you study what his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, preached to him, it was how to destroy the middle class and have a Marxist socialism form of government. It’s why he studied the Constitution – so he’d know how to dismantle it. Wake up, America! The little things give you away…always. Remember his refusal to salute the flag and to wear a flag pin on his lapel? He only quit it when he saw the public reaction. Watch the DVD!

Any American immigrating towards Mexico, France, Russian Federation, or even China or Japan are expected to learn the respective Nation’s langauges. The Liberals have constantly insisted on a multi-culturalism attitude towards Langauge, creating a new Tower of Babel nightmare for the American society. It should not matter what Nation a person is migrating from, but it should be done in a law biding and legal manner that fits that Nation’s Imigration laws. I am for legal immigration, as this puts the new peoples joining the United States into the voting system legally and empowers them to be voting Citizens unaffilated to any party of the Federal Republic giving them the invididual power to express their voice how they see fit. It is that Immigrant’s freedom to chose their politics, not any Liberal or any Conservative. But sadly many Liberals think they have the power to control what we eat, what we watch, what we drink, what we wear, what we say, what we write, and how we should vote…

Mr. Irons
very well put, I was reading on a link WE THE PEOPLE, THAT WASHINGTON WHERE SENDING REGISTRATION PAPERS TARGETTING THE IMMIGRANTS, AND EVEN ILLEGALS RECEIVED THEM,
which was creating possible illegal to vote, the senders comity explained to questions ask, they where helping the people to know how to votes, but the one who questioned was suspicious of what their intent was.
bye
by the way, another DEMOCRAT high profile woman left
OBAMA, she was shown to previously her praise for OBAMA,
it look like they are changing their tunes now,
they should have told the people before now so close to the election.

Tonight we await the Supreme Court’s ruling on Obamacare. I don’t understand why the average American doesn’t see why Obama decided to spend his first two years in office, when he had a super majority in Congress and could ram through anything he wanted, in getting a national healthcare system that mandated everyone have health insurance. He didn’t bother to use his super majority power at the time to help the immigration quagmire or his Hispanic constituents/voting block — and why? Because if he could get control of healthcare and yank individual control away, then he was a giant step closer to his Marxist/Socialist system of government. When you control people’s healthcare and education, and then you make it extremely difficult to get a job by regulating and taxing businesses to a standstill — you have effectively taken control of the voters. Huh? But can’t they just vote you out? No, funny thing about people’s psyches – they become scared to vote you out. They are dependent on government for so much of their lives so they have to keep the status quo going. That’s what Obama is trying to create. A dependent middle class. The lower socio/economic class is already over-dependent on the government but Obama knows he must do the same to the middle class. What better way than to take control of healthcare. Saul Alinsky would be patting him on the back right now. Not to mention his real dad, Frank Marshall Davis. Our Founding Fathers risked everything – their homes, their finances, and their lives — to have the individual freedom that no one on earth had ever had before…only in America. But they warned us back then, 200 years ago, that we would lose it all if we let government become too involved in our lives or made us too dependent on handouts. With freedom came the hard work of taking care of ourselves.