"[I]t remains unclear whether Mr. Obama can do anything that would satisfy Latino activists without providing fuel for Republican accusations that he is baldly sidestepping the nation’s laws."
“What are we to do when a president, regardless of motivation, nullifies our vote by failing to faithfully execute the law?” Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, said in a fiery floor speech this week. “Why pursue immigration reform if presidents can turn off the very provisions that we pass?”A move by Mr. Obama to limit deportations on his own would enrage House Republicans, who in recent weeks have cited Mr. Obama’s various executive actions — as well as his State of the Union promise to use a “pen and phone” to circumvent Congress when possible — as reasons they do not trust him enough to work with him on a broad issue like immigration.“It looks to me like he’s preparing another trial balloon to go forth with more likely unconstitutional executive actions,” said Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, who has long been a vocal opponent of the president on immigration. “I don’t know how trust can be restored.”
Elsewhere, on a related note... "Man planning to sue his rescuers possibly in the country illegally"
The man who is planning to sue the rescuers who saved his life from a submerged car for $500,000 is likely in the country illegally, according to a comment given by the man’s lawyer to Fox News’ Gretchen Carlson.Colorado rescuers saved Roy Ortiz from a submerged car in September, but now, Ortiz and his lawyer Ed Ferszt have filed an intent to sue the very first responders who saved Ortiz’s life. Why? Because they believe the rescue took two hours because the divers did not know Ortiz was alive in the flipped car.“Of course he was thankful because those divers did have a major role to play in saving his life that day,” Ferszt told Denver’s ABC affiliate earlier this week. Read More
The New York Times and the Daily Caller
10 comments:
Rent-seeking lawyers. Overheard at the liquor store:
"Do you sell gluten-free beer?"
"Yeah, over here."
"Why doesn't the store have a sign up advertising 'gluten-free' instead of relying on the brewers' label?"
"Liability. There are people going around, photographing signs and labels in order to gather evidence for a class action suit to sue brewers and retailers."
We are becoming a nation of litigious rent seekers.
What I don't get is why mass murderers and serial killers don't kill the people who need killing. Most stories in the news identify a number of such individuals every day.
No good turn goes unpunished.
bagoh20, isn't that the premise of Dexter?
Lawyers, thanks for the tag tip.
There are many colombians doing it on chaturbait. My sense is that there was a mass email or mailing letting them know how to make some money.
You guys will love chaturbait.
Repubbies are jealous at how arbitrarily and whimsically Obama chooses to pursue things. They're all like, "Hey! That's our prerogative! We invented the idea of having whimsical and arbitrary priorities!"
Dear effing dog. WTF? If they'd known he was alive and left him... well, I don't know that a person could sue for that anyway because I don't believe there is any law that a person *has* to put their life in danger for anyone, even "first responders." But to sue them because they had no idea he was in there or alive? I want to be rude and use Very. Bad. Words.
As for you Ritmo...
Can we please agree that whimsical and arbitrary priorities are *bad* and that anyone, on either side, being asked to compromise or otherwise reform anything at all, OUGHT to have the reasonable expectation that whatever everyone agrees on should be followed?
Imagine, oh, a Union arguing in good faith and pounding out an agreement that they give some points on and win some points on and then it's all signed and then the next day the company just does some other random thing...
And I'm tired of the lies... if you point out where Republicans do it, I'm right on board with condeming them too... just as a random example there's this one, "No one wants to take your guns away." And yet, clearly, no one needs to follow any law passed, and those suggesting this or that "reasonable" regulation are on record as saying they'd take every gun if they thought they could, and *then* the answer to a logical, rational, expectation that "I've got a phone and a pen" or Holder will just ignore whatever he wants and "there is no IRS scandal" and there is NO reason for a thinking, rational person to enter into any sort of negotiations whatsoever.
At least politicians used to keep it under the table, keep up appearances. Now? Not even that.
To broach the topic of illegals who were brought here when they were children, under the age of 10 yrs old let's say, I have a big problem with deporting those children. They didn't ask to be brought here. They didn't commit any crimes. For many of them, this USA is all that they know. They went to elementary school and high school.
They didn't commit any crimes. Their parents did, however. If you use the logic that the children will suffer if their parents are punished for the crimes that the parents committed, then by that same logic NO one EVER with children should be punished since putting mommy or daddy in jail would have an adverse effect on the children. (Won't someone please think of the children /sarcasm)
Where do you draw the line?.
I thought that Rick Perry was unfairly criticized for his stance on allowing IN State Texas children who have gone to elementary school and high school IN the State and who are qualified for college to participate in the same benefits that those other children whose parents were not illegal would use. The kids who wanted to go to college shouldn't be punished because of their parents' wrong doing. The kids went to school and took the same classes as their friends, got good grades and want to continue on. They should be encouraged to get educated and become productive citizens.
Of course Ritmo and other liberals will be confounded that I, who people want to hang a label of Conservative on, will hold such antithetical views. This is the danger of trying label and pigeonhole people based on your perceptions and biases of what you THINK other people think.
I'm conservative and I'm liberal and I'm also agnostic about a whole lot of stuff and frankly could give a damn about most so called "social" issues.
Post a Comment