Obama: Heads Congress does what I want, tails I do it anyway
Over at Human Events, Jim Hoft had the same reaction I did to the Obama administration’s announcement Friday that it will only selectively enforce our immigration laws.
That is, Hoft remembered all the way back to…when was it? Oh yes: a whole 25 days earlier, when President Obama said this to La Raza activists:
THE PRESIDENT: Now, I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books, but that doesn’t mean I don’t know very well the real pain and heartbreak that deportations cause. I share your concerns and I understand them. And I promise you, we are responding to your concerns and working every day to make sure we are enforcing flawed laws in the most humane and best possible way. Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. (Applause.) And believe me, right now dealing with Congress –
AUDIENCE: Yes, you can! Yes, you can! Yes, you can! Yes, you can! Yes, you can!
THE PRESIDENT: Believe me — believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting.
(Laughter.)
I promise you. Not just on immigration reform.
(Laughter.)
But that’s not how — that’s not how our system works.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Change it!
When the president of the United States says, “I swore an oath to uphold the laws,” he’s not supposed to follow it with a “but.”
But apparently that’s how our system works now.
Last year, Obama and the Democrats tried to pass the DREAM Act, which would accomplish some of the same goals as the administration’s new flouting of immigration law. There are some reasonable arguments on the side of the law’s proponents — just as there are some reasonable arguments on the side of its opponents who point out the obvious: that creating a great big new incentive to skirt our legal immigration avenue, without any better enforcement of the border and other immigration law, is only going to worsen illegal immigration and its associated problems.
But as is this administration’s wont, when “our system” didn’t deliver the desired results, the solution was to give in to “temptation” and take matters into its own hands. And that should be considered wholly unreasonable, whichever side of the DREAM Act debate you land on.
So, now we know there’s a broader reason for Obama to complain nonstop about the difficulty of working with Congress. It’s not just an excuse for his sagging approval ratings. It’s a rationale for circumventing Congress and doing whatever he likes.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
241 comments Add your comment
Kyle Wingfield
August 24th, 2011
4:31 pm
Rod: First, there’s a difference between not making new rules and not enforcing the laws that are already on the books. Second, EPA regulations are rules made by the EPA and enforced by the EPA, which is part of the executive branch. Not the same as laws passed by Congress.
Obama victory?
August 24th, 2011
4:32 pm
he liberal media is declaring Libya an Obama “victory” –not so fast hippie wannabees
WASHINGTON (AP) – No one can be sure who controls the Libyan government’s weapons stockpiles, a stew of deadly chemicals, raw nuclear material and some 30,000 shoulder-fired rockets that officials fear could fall into terrorists’ hands in the chaos of Moammar Gadhafi’s downfall or afterward.
One immediate worry, U.S. intelligence and military officials say, is that Gadhafi might use the weapons to make a last stand. But officials also face the troubling prospect that the material, which was left under Gadhafi’s control by a U.S.-backed disarmament pact, could be obtained by al-Qaida or other militants even after a rebel victory is secured.
The main stockpile of mustard gas and other chemicals, stored in corroding drums, is at a site southeast of Tripoli. Mustard gas can cause severe blistering and death. A cache of hundreds of tons of raw uranium yellowcake is stored at a small nuclear facility east of the capital.
Liberals hate facts!
August 24th, 2011
4:36 pm
@ Mark v –so it is not a fact? or was his statement that BUSH and CHENEY (not the US Congress) “oh we are going to invade anyway” not what he wrote?
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
4:37 pm
MarkV – Are you back again? After the intellectual spanking I gave you regarding the “individual mandate” in Obamacare?
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
4:50 pm
Karl Childers @4:37 pm: Still exercising your powers of self-deception?
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
4:56 pm
If our debate over the individual mandate had taken place in a video game, I would be holding your severed head high above my own while simultaneously raising my intellectual sword to the heavens with my other hand. Game, set, match.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
4:58 pm
Liberals hate facts! @4:36 pm
I think you should really debate with Darwin, but since I intervened – what Darwin wrote was as follows
“Did Bush and Cheney use a UN resolution from the first Gulf war to invade Iraq? They tried to get the UN to approve of the 2nd invasion for WMDs and when they wouldn’t pass a resolution for it, Bush and Cheney said “oh well, we’re going to invade anyway.” They used the first UN resolution to justify their invasion.”
That is different from talking about Congressional resolution. I am not sure Darwin is exactly right, but the fact is that Bush acted without a UN resolution authorizing the invasion. He did have Congressional authorization – sort of. I hope we are not going to rehash that question here.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
4:59 pm
Karl Childers @4:56 pm: You are quite a self-deceiving joker, aren’t you?
oh the life
August 24th, 2011
5:02 pm
The Obamas’ summer break on Martha’s Vineyard has already been branded a PR disaster after the couple arrived four hours apart on separate government jets.
But according to new reports, this is the least of their extravagances.
White House sources today claimed that the First Lady has spent $10million of U.S. taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.
Michelle Obama, has been accused of spending $10m of public money on vacations
they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.
‘When it’s all added up, she’s spent more than $10million in taxpayers’ money on her vacations.’
The First Lady is believed to have taken 42 days of holiday in the past year, including a $375,000 break in Spain and a four-day ski trip to Vail, Colorado, where she spent $2,000 a night on a suite at the Sebastian hotel.
And the first family’s nine-day stay in Martha’s Vineyard is also proving costly, with rental of the Blue Heron Farm property alone costing an estimated $50,000 a week.
‘Michelle also enjoys drinking expensive booze during her trips. She favours martinis with top-shelf vodka and has a taste for rich sparking wines.
Doc
August 24th, 2011
5:07 pm
Thank god Obama is doing this. Better late than never. The sheer racist bigotry of the majority of Georgians and especially republicans is an utter disgrace. You people are more out of the mainstream than ever.
Dave R.
August 24th, 2011
5:07 pm
Kyle, I’m going to agree with an earlier poster and say that elected officials have always tried (some more successfully than others) to selectively enforce laws on the books.
The problem becomes when someone sets the standards so high when coming into office and proclaiming that they will be so ethical and open and above board – then do the same thing that others have done.
There is also a difference in not funding something (like a law you didn’t agree with but can’t overturn) vs. selectively enforcing a law for one group, and not for another group, which is I think the point you were trying to make. If you can’t treat everybody the same, regardless of your dislike for the law, then you lose the moral high ground when wanting to rail about equality issues.
Dave R.
August 24th, 2011
5:09 pm
Doc, there are many of us who don’t give a damn about the racial makeup of anybody, but merely wish our laws to be enforced, and enforced equally.
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
5:15 pm
MarkV – Just read the opinion of the 11th Circuit Court as it pertains to the individual mandate. Better yet, go back and read the end of the thread on which I, and many others, ate your intellectual lunch.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
5:19 pm
Karl Childers @5:15 pm: Apparently you need these imaginary victories to get back some measure of self-esteem after the incoherent babbling that you submitted as arguments. A visit to a psychiatrist would be more effective.
Hillbilly D
August 24th, 2011
5:27 pm
The problem becomes when someone sets the standards so high when coming into office and proclaiming that they will be so ethical and open and above board – then do the same thing that others have done.
Those are always the ones you need to watch. My Grandpa always told me that if a man felt the need to tell you he was honest, he was probably anything but honest.
Dave R.
August 24th, 2011
5:29 pm
Yup.
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
5:30 pm
MarkV – I must now ask you to cease putting your head on my chopping block. Please sir, read the opinion of the 11th Circuit Court. Those Clinton-appointees nailed it, eloquently and succintly. My self-esteem is robust. Your intellect, however, is beginning to look feeble.
Dave R.
August 24th, 2011
5:30 pm
Oh, and hello from a fellow Bookman expatriate, Hillbilly!
Dave R.
August 24th, 2011
5:32 pm
Karl, I read some of MarkV’s posts about the individual mandate.
Let’s just say that he didn’t get past the reality of the ruling, and relied on his own personal belief.
Good thing the Constitution doesn’t work that way.
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
5:36 pm
Exactly. After all, it was only Alice who had a problem with Wonderland.
Hillbilly D
August 24th, 2011
5:47 pm
Greeting Dave R. Me and you disagree as much or more than we agree but you’ve always been civil towards me.
Gm
August 24th, 2011
5:49 pm
oh the life
For idiots like you who dont think the President deserve a Vacation here are the numbers look it up
First 3 years
Georgia Bush vacation 180 days
President Obama 60
Never heard a word from you idiots when he lived on the golf course, let see we had troops dying in Irag over 3,000 Americans in Ny died his first 3 years and yes he took vacations ”””
GT
August 24th, 2011
5:56 pm
“Circumventing” is not breaking the law or you could lock him up. It is very similar to hijacking the law like the Tea Party, but neither is breaking the law. Obama could have used the constitution to raise the debt ceiling but chose not to. In doing so he showed huge resolve. In this he did not circumvent Congress. Only when it would have harmed individuals like slavery and child labor did he intervene. Now the bullies are calling foul as if they were the harmed party. Man are the Republicans geniuses at being the victims even when they start the fights and are the cause of what they complain about. If you don’t like what Obama is doing vote him out of office, at lease you have that available to you, most of the nation have to suffer the pirates of the Tea Party with no recourse.
Moderate Line
August 24th, 2011
6:02 pm
So Obama says doing things on my own are very tempting but that is not how our system works.
It would seem to me he is advocating complying with the law because it is the law even though it is not.
Contrast this with the Republican icon like Reagan who simply ignore the laws concerning the contras and did is own thing.
Rafe Hollister
August 24th, 2011
6:03 pm
Hillbilly D
Thanks for adding that, your Grandpa was a smart feller.
I will use it in the future, I am sure. I have a good friend who annoys me to no end starting each important sentence with “let me be honest with you”. I don’t think he realizes that he is saying that everything else he says is false.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:03 pm
Karl Childers @5:30 pm: Make the appointment!
@@
August 24th, 2011
6:04 pm
Make laws to break laws?
Bush willingly promoted immigration reform.
Obama, desperately pandering for votes, leads from behind.
Won’t end well for him either.
How’s security on the border?
Moderate Line
August 24th, 2011
6:04 pm
Correction:
It would seem to me he is advocating complying with the law because it is the law even though he does not agree with it.
Rafe Hollister
August 24th, 2011
6:08 pm
GT
You have been in the Koolaid again. Barry did not use the constitution option to raise the debt ceiling because his own attorneys told him it was unconstitutional and would subject him to being sued by Congress. They told him he would lose the fight in the Supreme Court.
He did not decline this option as some noble jesture. The man has no scrupples and would do just about anything he could get away with to furter his agenda.
Hillbilly D
August 24th, 2011
6:08 pm
Rafe
Yes he was and he only had the equivalent of about a 4th grade education (in those days they just went to school for 3 months in winter, the rest of the time they worked). Judgement is something you’re born with I think and of course, it’s refined through hard knocks. And as for this part of your comment I don’t think he realizes that he is saying that everything else he says is false. it sort of falls under, you can tell as much about a man by what he doesn’t say as by what he does.
Women, too but they’re harder to figure out.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:09 pm
Dave R. @5:32 pm:” Let’s just say that he didn’t get past the reality of the ruling, and relied on his own personal belief. Good thing the Constitution doesn’t work that way.”
Apparently you read few posts, or you have a poor ability to understand arguments. Nothing in my debate wit Karl dealt with the constitutionality of the individual mandate, except when Karl introduced the 11th Circuit Court ruling after all his incoherent semi-arguments failed.
TruthBe
August 24th, 2011
6:09 pm
Obama is a corupt liberal liar period. He’s out to pimp your vote so he will say and do ANYTHING to get your votes. Including breaking the laws of the Land. Their is no watchman for the President, Senate, Congress, Attorney General, Federal law Enforcement,TSA, Homeland Security, or any other heads of state.
TruthBe
August 24th, 2011
6:10 pm
There instead of their. Sorry
Rafe Hollister
August 24th, 2011
6:12 pm
Doc
Mainstream huh, I am betting you are in that 38% that approve of Obama’s performance. I guess for a public school graduate 38% is the mainstream.
Not A US Citizen
August 24th, 2011
6:21 pm
Its sad how many of you think.
I came here illegally at age of 9, my parents worked and started there own business, My parents are still illegal, yet they pay taxes, do donations and pays for 12 other US Citizens college tuition, and they ask nothing in return, just to maintain a B average. The 12 US Citizens that we help, are: 9 White, and 3 African Americans, we can not help any Latinos, because they can not get into college because of there legal status, yet we know many that graduated with 4.0 GPA.
Its not simple becoming a Citizen, We believe that everyone has the right to have an education, that is why we paid for other peoples tuition. My dad make more than 3 million dollars a year, and we do not have “papers” but it doesn’t mean that we take other peoples jobs, that we don’t pay taxes.
Please open your eyes people, its not segregation is it?
“An eye for an eye only ends up making the world blind”
If you guys have nothing positive to say, than please don’t say anything. Do not pretend that you know everything.
SAD, SAD, SAD………
God Bless You All.
I repeat …. *******My dad make more than 3 million dollars a year, and we do not have “papers” but it doesn’t mean that we take other peoples jobs, that we don’t pay taxes.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:24 pm
There are two kinds of visitors to these blogs. Visitors of one kind want to argue some issue; those of the other kind only want to vent their steam, or more often, their hatred. They do not realize that they are painting a picture of themselves when they do that.
@ Not A US Citizen
August 24th, 2011
6:36 pm
Well one thing is for sure, being raised as illegal has taught you to tell some very tall tales. Next time you try and create a story in your defense, make sure you tone it down a bit. A post like yours will do more harm than good to your plight. Think before you post, and Bless Your Heart and we say here in the South!
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
6:38 pm
MarkV – You have yet to convince anyone why the Federal government should have the power to force the citizens of the United States to buy a certain product, whatever that product may be. Your argument is a straw man yet you mindlessly put it forth like a blithering idiot. You fancy yourself as some kind of skilled debater when, in fact, you’re nothing of the sort. You’re simply deluded and have somehow come to believe that what belongs to others should belong to you.
Rafe Hollister
August 24th, 2011
6:40 pm
MarV
Hatred is just the term of the day for the Libs. When they can’t stand up to the logic of the argument they turn to names like hater, extremist, radical, no nothings, knuckledraggers, on and on. Yes, it is done by the conservatives as well. No one on here, except maybe TrishaDisha, hates anyone.
The picture I want to paint is a law abiding, tax paying, Constitution loving, God fearing, flag waving patriot. If the times are such that people like me are branded haters, then so be it, call me a hater, if that makes you feel above the fray.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:40 pm
Karl Childers @6:38 pm: Make the appointment!
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:42 pm
Rafe Hollister @6:40 pm
I suppose you overlooked the name calling here from the right.
Rafe Hollister (non hater)
August 24th, 2011
6:43 pm
know nothings, MarkV, before you question my education.
Rafe Hollister (non hater)
August 24th, 2011
6:44 pm
MarkV
As you tell your critics reread my post. I do not deny the right uses names, but Hater ain’t one of them.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
6:47 pm
Rafe Hollister (non hater) @6:43 pm:“know nothings, MarkV, before you question my education.”
Is that a post, or an attempt of one?
Skip
August 24th, 2011
6:58 pm
You guys are a hoot.
Karl Childers
August 24th, 2011
6:58 pm
MarkV – To which appointment are you referring? I have trouble interpreting your non sequiturs.
Tiberius (the former Dave R.)
August 24th, 2011
7:17 pm
“There are two kinds of visitors to these blogs. Visitors of one kind want to argue some issue; those of the other kind only want to vent their steam, or more often, their hatred.”
Actually, three kinds.
You’re the kind that just likes to combine the two.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
7:30 pm
Karl Childers @6:58 pm: “MarkV – To which appointment are you referring? I have trouble interpreting your non sequiturs.”
You also have a trouble with your memory. The appointment with your psychiatrist, which I recommended earlier.
You just cannot let go, can you? You have to try to convince yourself, and perhaps others, that you “won” a debate with me.
MarkV
August 24th, 2011
7:44 pm
Tiberius (the former Dave R.) @7:17 pm:
I suppose you have some basis for this judgment?
post worth repeating from get schooled
August 24th, 2011
8:17 pm
I teach at an elementary school, and while I feel that most immigrant children are in many ways easier to teach (more motivated, better behaved, and at this level–feel less entitled), I also believe that our school systems are grossly over-burdened. If English isn’t spoken by their parents at home, English is considered the child’s second language. It doesn’t matter how well the child speaks English. Therefore, these children and their parents are entitled to every service (ESOL, translators, etc.) the school system can offer. Motivation to learn English is not created this way.
With that said, I would like to see our country return to an immigration policy that existed in the late 1800s and early 1900s. People were not allowed in this country unless they currently had a family member sponsor them (somewhere they could live–and someone who would financially support them until they were able to support themselves), or they already had a job in this county waiting for them. Most came through Ellis Island and were required to pass a physical examination before they were allowed on the mainland. I also believe our government had an established number of immigrants allowed in the country annually. With fewer numbers, assimilation was gradual, thus not over-burdening the country.
Government entitlements didn’t exist back then; thus, ALL people were more motivated to get a job–any job. Everything was printed in English–no translators! In order to survive in this country, ALL immigrants were very motivated to learn the language of their new country–and they were proud to do so!!
Our legislators have ruined this country by advocating “government dependence” for all. They have killed the motivation of many of the residents of this country.
I do believe illegal immigrants should be deported; they broke the law! Congress should get busy eliminating/limiting all welfare programs, particularly to non-citizens. This would definitely curtail illegal immigration. Jobs that would be vacated by illegal immigrants could then be filled by U.S. citizens. Some say U.S. citizens wouldn’t want these jobs– if the welfare programs were curtailed/eliminated, they wouldn’t have much of a choice now, would they?
Quite honestly, I’m so very tired of the “entitlement mentality” that has been created in this county (BY OUR GOVERNMENT)–somebody needs to do something about it! Get rid of entitlements, and illegal immigration will take care of itself!!!