Immigration Speech: Does Obama See Himself as an Elected Dictator?

Capture

Only a short time ago, President Obama himself admitted this action would be illegal and unconstitutional

by Warren Mass | The New American | November 21, 2014

Speaking from the White House on prime-time television on November 20, President Obama did not deliver any surprises as he unveiled his plan to use executive action to grant protection from deportation to millions of illegal immigrants.

After all, the administration had already repeatedly made clear its intent to rule by decree on immigration and other issues, despite the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, only Congress may make law.

Under the president’s plan, two groups of illegal aliens would qualify: those who have been in the United States for more than five years; and those who have children who are American citizens or legal residents. Obama promised those who fit his criteria: “If you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes — you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law.”

ABC News reported that those who qualify for deferred action through a son or daughter that is a U.S. citizen will receive immediate amnesty from deportation.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have been instructed to “immediately begin identifying persons in their custody” who meet the criteria; as well as consider the new criteria for “all individuals encountered.”

Heading off criticism from those who would label his plan for what it is — amnesty — the president said:

I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it’s not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today — millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time.

Obama justified his use of executive authority to shield illegal aliens from deportation on the failure of Congress to pass what he termed “common sense law.” “But until that happens,” he said, “there are actions I have the legal authority to take as President — the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican presidents before me — that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.”

The executive action that Obama announced last night was a complete about-face from his comments on the proper use of presidential authority during a Univision Town Hall held on March 28, 2011 at Bell Multicultural High School in Washington, D.C.

When the moderator of that event presented a question, “What if at least you grant temporary protective status (TPS) to undocumented students,” Obama answered, in part:

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 that there we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The Executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those 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 on how we have to enforce our immigration system, that for me to simply though executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.

Obama made the same point during his 2008 campaign for president at a Town Hall meeting in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, in which he condemned President Bush’s attempts to bypass Congress. “The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all, and that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States of America,” he said.

From his description of his planned actions during last night’s address, it is apparent that what Obama had previously stated would not conform with his “appropriate role as President” is very different from what he now deems appropriate, legal, and constitutional.

The plan drew immediate criticism from Republican members of Congress, with much of the criticism based not so much on immigration as on Obama’s blatant usurpation of authority and disregard for the separation of powers he meticulously referred to in his 2011 talk at Bell School in D.C.

“[The president’s] actions are not only unconstitutional and in defiance of the American people who said they did not want amnesty in the 2014 elections, but they are also unfair to every immigrant who has come to our nation legally,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) posted on his Facebook profile.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said he “will not sit idly by and let the President bypass Congress and our Constitution.”

“President Obama is not above the law and has no right to issue executive amnesty. His actions blatantly ignore the separations of powers and the principles our country was founded on. The President has said 22 times previously that he does not have the power to legislate on immigration,” Paul said in a statement.

In a November 20 article in USA Today, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) wrote:

Only a short time ago, President Obama himself admitted this action would be illegal and unconstitutional: “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own” he explained, adding “that’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.” President Obama also said that: “The problem is “that I’m the president of the United States, I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.”

Apparently, America now has its first emperor.

“That’s just not how our democracy works,” House Speaker John Boehner said in a statement after the White House released the details of Obama’s plan. “The president has said before that he’s ‘not king’ and he’s ‘not an emperor,’ but he’s sure acting like one.”

King? Emperor? How about elected dictator?

OBAMACARE LIKELY TO COST $300 BILLION MORE THAN THOUGHT – CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

Capture

CBO hasn’t officially investigated the cost of Obamacare since the summer of 2012

The real cost of Obamacare will be hundreds of billions of dollars more than expected, Republican members of the Senate Budget Committee now say, and will greatly increase the federal deficit during the next decade.

Contrary to claims made by the White House, United States President Barack Obama’s hallmark health care plan will actually have a tremendous toll on the government, GOP members of the SBC committee allege in a new report.

According to an analysis of data received by the Congressional Budget Office, Senate Republican say so-called Obamacare won’t reduce the federal budget deficit by $180 billion by 2019 as predicted, but will actually set the US back another $131 billion in the hole.

The CBO hasn’t officially investigated the cost of Obamacare since the summer of 2012, Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) says in the report, and complications in the two-plus years since have, according to his group’s analysis, caused costs to change tremendously.

“The most recent CBO estimate, released in July 2012, indicated the law was projected to reduce the deficit by $109 billion over the 10-year period from FY 2013–2022. Nevertheless, considerable changes have occurred since then: a botched rollout of the insurance exchanges; unilateral changes made by the Administration to exempt certain groups from complying with key aspects of the law; technical adjustments to CBO’s baseline projections for federal health spending; updated economic forecasts; a better understanding of the labor market effects of the legislation; and a new 10-year budget window,” the report reads in part. “Together these changes have significant implications for the sign of the deficit impact of the Democrats’ health law.”

“[I]f nothing had changed since 2012,” the report continues, “then the legislation would be projected to reduce the deficit by $180 billion” by 2024.

After reviewing new data, however, that number changes drastically. In all, GOP analysts say the difference between the 2012 prediction and the latest analyses amounts to $311 billion.

“Altogether, the SBC Republican staff analysis finds that after taking these significant changes since 2012 into account, the Democrats’ health care law will increase the budget deficit by $131 billion over the current 10-year budget window (FY 2015–2024),” the report finds. “This estimate is arrived at by taking the $180 billion in projected deficit reduction from the CBO 2012 extrapolation and then accounting for the lower net cost of the coverage provisions ($83 billion), the lower estimated federal health care savings under the plan ($132 billion), as well as the lower projected revenue levels when including the labor market effects of the legislation ($262 billion).”

Meanwhile, other figures concerning Pres. Obama’s Affordable Care Act could fluctuate in only the next coming days: although Americans were allowed to begin enrolling in the healthcare program last October 1, this time around they will have to wait until November 15 — 11 days after the upcoming mid-term elections.

“This is more than just a glitch,” Tim Phillips, president of free-market Americans for Prosperity, said in a statement last week. “The administration’s decision to withhold the costs of this law until after Election Day is just more proof that Obamacare is a bad deal for Americans.”

Last year’s scheduled launch of the ACA was ultimately marred by a number of incidents, including major problems with the program’s website and the inability for many people to retain old insurance providers. In July 2014, a survey conducted by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation determined that 53 percent of respondents viewed the ACA unfavorably.

VIDEO: Watch Obama Say Something 16 Times, and Then Deny Ever Saying It

Obama has been getting slammed for prematurely ending the war in Iraq, for no other reason than to score political points, only to see all of the work that our troops have done there collapse and for terrorists to move in. Now he’s desperately trying to convince everyone that he never said he ended the war in Iraq. Uh, OK, Barack. You sure about that?

In 2008, then candidate Obama promised to end the war in Iraq. In 2010, President Obama did just that, precipitously pulling all U.S. troops out of Iraq, despite warnings against such action, and despite the Iraqi Army being far from ready to stand on their own.

During the 2012 election, Obama repeatedly, ad nauseam, reminded everyone who would listen that he personally had ended the war in Iraq, proud that he had fulfilled his campaign promise.

Of course, now that the Islamic State has arisen to fill the vacuum left when our troops pulled out, and the country has descended into a brutally violent mess, Obama is attempting to rewrite history, claiming leaving Iraq was “not my decision,” and blaming the entire mess on Bush, as he has a tendency to do.

Everything is always Bush’s fault with Obama, even a decision that Obama made long after Bush was out of office. 2016 just can’t get here fast enough.

Obama Should Take A Lesson On Immigration From Australia

Capture

By Robert Gehl
October 14, 2014

The Obama Administration could learn a lot from Australia on immigration.

The country has taken a very tough stance against illegal immigration – promising to deport anybody landing on their shores and assuring possible immigrants that the rules won’t change anytime soon.

In a message to possible illegal immigrants, Australia Customs released a video outlining their hardass policy.

The poster – above – sends a strong message – “NO WAY – YOU WILL NOT MAKE AUSTRALIA HOME.” The stated intent is to stop rampant human smuggling. In the video, General Angus Campbell warns potential immigrants that not only will they be deported, but that smugglers’ promises they will be taken to New Zealand are not true – that no smuggling boat has ever made its way to New Zealand.

The policy is called “Operation Sovereign Borders.”

Asylum seekers who travel by boat without a visa will not end up in Australia. The rules apply to everyone; families, children, unaccompanied children, educated and skilled. There are no exceptions.

Australia is serious about protecting its borders and will stop anyone who attempts to come illegally by boat.

The OSB Joint Agency Task Force is delivering a range of offshore communication activities to inform people considering travelling to Australia illegally by boat that the rules have changed, they should not believe the lies of people smugglers and there is no way they will make Australia home.

Yup. We could learn a thing or two from our friends Down Under.

Blame game begins in US after nurse infected with Ebola

Capture

A leading US health official sparked controversy after saying it is “deeply disturbing” that a Dallas nurse became infected with Ebola while caring for a patient, arguing that many US hospitals are ill-prepared to handle the virus.

In America’s first test case in dealing with Ebola outside of Africa, the US medical community has not performed as well as expected. A female nurse who cared for Thomas Eric Duncan, who arrived in the US last month from Liberia, became the first person to contract the disease inside the United States.

Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), blamed a break in protocol as the reason for the transmission.

“The healthcare workers who cared for this individual may have had a breach of the same nature,” Frieden said in a press conference Sunday. “It is certainly very concerning and it tells us there is a need to enhance training and make sure protocols are followed.

“The protocols work… but we know that even a single lapse or breach can result in infection.”

The worst Ebola epidemic in history, which has already killed over 4,000 people, broke out in West Africa in March. Since then, medical officials have been sounding the alarm that the disease may spread like wildfire around the planet.

Capture

Meanwhile, despite having had “extensive contact … on multiple occasions” with Duncan, who died on October 8 in an isolation unit, the Dallas nurse was reportedly not among the nearly 50 individuals being monitored for the disease, which has a 21-day incubation period.

“It’s deeply concerning that this infection occurred,” Frieden said. “We can’t let any hospital let its guard down.”

Frieden’s comments sparked controversy among some medical officials, who argue that the transmission occurred due to a systemic failure, in that not all hospitals are prepared to handle such severe cases. Others questioned the timing of the criticism.

Capture
“You don’t scapegoat and blame when you have a disease outbreak,” said Bonnie Castillo, a registered nurse and a disaster relief expert at National Nurses United, as quoted by Reuters. “We have a system failure. That is what we have to correct.”

Castillo blamed the problem on a lack of communication between the medical authorities and the thousands of medical facilities across the United States.

In preparation for an emergency, hospitals “post something on a bulletin board referring workers and nurses to the CDC guidelines. That is not how you drill and practice and become expert,” she said.

CDC spokesman Tom Skinner said it may consider designating hospitals in each region to handle any Ebola cases.

“We’ve been doing a lot over the past few months, but clearly there is more to do,” he said. “The notion of possibly transporting patients diagnosed with Ebola to these hospitals is not something that is out of the question, and is something we may look into.”

In August, American doctor Kent Brantly recovered from the Ebola virus after contracting the deadly disease in Liberia. He was treated with the blood plasma of an African child who had survived the virus, as well as with the experimental drug, ZMapp. Another US doctor, Rick Sacra, also made a full recovery from the virus last month after receiving blood plasma transfusions from Brantly, in addition to another experimental drug called TKM-Ebola.

READ MORE: Scientists in Russia developing three Ebola vaccines – Health Ministry

Meanwhile, the Spanish nurse infected with Ebola, Teresa Romero Ramos, is in a stable condition and showing signs of improvement, the Spanish government has said.

Health official Fernando Simón told reporters that the presence of the virus in Ramos’s blood appears to be decreasing. “We have high hopes that the infection is under control,” he said.