The problem with Obama’s immigration order is how, not what, it does


Executive orders are not inherently unconstitutional. The president has the authority to issue orders to his administration instructing them how to carry out laws passed by Congress. In this sense, the president has the authority to order Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prioritize deportations by expediting removal of certain illegal immigrants while focusing less on removal of others.

However, the order President Obama announced on Thursday night, which expands the already unlawfully unilateral Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals executive order he issued in 2012, goes a step further. DACA and the new order do not just set priorities for deportations, they exempt whole sets of immigrants of a certain age, relation, or arrival date from deportation completely. This is the authority of Congress, not the president.

The Office of Legal Council in the White House makes the point for me:

Communists close borders while the free world lets the walls fall


This is a photo of the 300,000 people who gathered yesterday to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

The freedom to travel is an inherent right that libertarians and conservatives sometimes take for granted. Perhaps this is a result of the U.S. government conditioning us to view travel as a privilege, because without a license from the Department of Motor Vehicles we cannot legally drive on public roads, and without being cleared for air travel by the Transportation Security Agency, we can’t fly.

The right to travel freely does not stop at state borders and it should not stop at international borders. And yet many of us support immigration reform in the form of stricter border control. After all, we can’t have open borders with a welfare state, and an increase in the number of needy people would increase the size of the already-bloated welfare state, including entitlements like Social Security which began running a deficit in 2010 which will quadruple in the next 20 years.

The size of the welfare state is a huge problem. Since the Congress seems incapable of cutting welfare spending, many people focus on changing the number of people receiving benefits. The most palatable policy changes that can temporarily address the number of people receiving Social Security checks is increasing the retirement age and making Social Security means-tested.

Boehner vs. Obama on Immigration: A story of two Star Trek games

Since the McCain-Kennedy bill was introduced in 2005, Congress has been playing games with immigration reform proposals almost non-stop. It turns out, those games are almost perfectly represented in Star Trek lore.

Speaker of the House John Boehner is playing is multi-dimensional chess.


This game is seen in the original Star Trek series and The Next Generation.


The rules are never explained in either series, but it is clearly a complicated game. Boehner similarly has to juggle many dimensions of the prickly issue of immigration in the face of opposition from several directions.

He has House conservatives threatening his speakership if he even says the word “immigration” in public, moderates who want a bill but maybe not before the election, libertarians who want to just pass a bill and make the issue go away, big donors who want reform yesterday for their corporate friends, fire-breathing grass roots activists shouting about “shamnesty”, and a cynically intransient Senate leadership who passed their bill but won’t consider anything less. He has to move his pieces on the upper and lower levels of the board very carefully if he wants to keep his seat, his job, and his party in power in both the short and long term.

Carney proves Democrats don’t actually care about immigration reform

It has long been joked that President Obama’s statements come with expiration dates, the half-life of which is rapidly decaying. We have a new example. Earlier this week at a Wall Street Journal event, he said that he would be open to a piecemeal approach to immigration reform.

“If they want to chop that thing up into five pieces, as long as all five pieces get done, I don’t care what it looks like,” Mr. Obama said. “What we don’t want to do is simply carve out one piece of it…but leave behind some of the tougher stuff that still needs to get done.”

Nevermind that this is how legislation was passed for the first nearly 200 years of our government’s history, this was seen as a huge concession. Even something as unified in our recollection as the New Deal was actually a series of bills and programs enacted over nearly a decade in the 1930s.

But apparently that approach is no longer viable in the age of the grand bargain and comprehensive reforms. Today White House Press Secretary Jay Carney simultaneously announced and enforced the expiration date on Obama’s previous statement on immigration reform earlier this week by declaring that the President wouldn’t sign any bill that wasn’t all-inclusive.

“In the end, this has to be comprehensive,” Carney told reporters during the daily White House briefing.

Senator Rubio is right on immigration

Marco Rubio

Senator Marco Rubio is right on immigration. In his remarks regarding the immigration bill passed by the Senate last week, Rubio noted that immigration is an American story.

For over two hundred years now, they have come… . From Ireland and Poland, from Germany and France. From Mexico and Cuba, they have come. They have come because in the land of their birth, their dreams were bigger than their opportunities.

As Jack Kemp so famously said, “We are a nation of immigrants.” From the Native Americans who crossed the land bridge over what is now the Bering Strait to the apex of European immigration in the early 20th Century (when 13.5 million immigrants were living in the United States), America has always been the land of opportunity.

CPS Tyrannizes Again; Abolish Child Protective Services Now

Yet another incident of Child Protective Services violating civil rights has emerged, this time in Sacramento:

SACRAMENTO, CA - A Sacramento family was torn apart after a 5-month-old baby boy was taken from his parents following a visit to the doctor.

The young couple thought their problems were behind them after their son had a scare at the hospital, but once they got home their problems got even worse.

It all began nearly two weeks ago, when Anna Nikolayev and her husband Alex took their 5-month-old boy Sammy to Sutter Memorial Hospital to be treated for flu symptoms, but they didn’t like the care Sammy was getting.

The mother had questions about what was going on with the care, but it soon escalated out of control:

Anna said Sammy suffers from a heart murmur and had been seeing a doctor at Sutter for regular treatment since he was born. After Sammy was treated for flu symptoms last week, doctors at Sutter admitted him to the pediatric ICU to monitor his condition. After a few days, Anna said doctors began talking about heart surgery.

“If we got the one mistake after another, I don’t want to have my baby have surgery in the hospital where I don’t feel safe,” Anna said.

Anna argued with doctors about getting a second opinion. Without a proper discharge, she finally took Sammy out of the hospital to get a second opinion at Kaiser Permanente.

“The police showed up there. They saw that the baby was fine,” Anna said. “They told us that Sutter was telling them so much bad stuff that they thought that this baby is dying on our arms.”

More Than American Socialization

Traditionally Conservative institutions like the New Republic, Fox News, Cato Institute, American Interest, and many more are being subsumed by the leftist creep of socialism. This is more, than just mere observation. Main editors at the New Republic are openly ‘Obama for America’ contributors and backers on their Facebook subscription sites.

Fox News has gotten monetary contributions, and is; heavily backed by billionaire investor George Soros (who also supports Occupy Wall Street movements throughout the US).

Stalwart think-tanks like the Cato Institute are changing hands, covertly, because main-stream establishment parties like the GOP, DNC are not content with ‘national’ philosophic currents. Even the beatdown ultra conservative American Interest magazine, is starting to run articles by Harvard liberal pundits like Fareed Zakaria, among others.

To me, these development are frightening. Pres. Obama was no joke when he announced in 2008 during his Chicago platform, that he wanted “to fundamentally transform America.”

Capitalism is not failing, never has, never will. But somehow, these fringe liberals, European socialists and ‘intellectuals’ are coming around on some shape of footing: I dare claim, that they are actually finding their warstance against the United States.

Make no mistake, while transformations are taking place; they are always hardest to pin-point, to frame. But they are happening. Like a plains-storm gathering.

What the left actually do, and what they are planning; go together symbiotically.

Americans are to be supplanted as guarantors of freedom around the world; and be replaced with ‘multilateral’ bodies, assemblies and parliamentary bodies, that can then be filled with all sorts of non-American interests: the UN, NATO, ASEAN, the EU, Sahel Zone, inmates, criminals for a puppet-Global Government.

Swear on the Constitution

Our U.S. Constitution is a remarkably efficient document. It is our only founding charter. Many times changed, rendered, adumbrated. But it’s essence is unshakable. Written in Thomas Jefferson’s handwriting, edited against his will, pored over, discussed, hushed about, while it lay about some small wooden tables in independence Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Americans believe, that the Constitution is the link between our government and our lives. Congress and the Executive, can not overstep the harmony that exists, by each American following his path of liberty. Unfortunately, too many harmful minds, want too much power in this country. Power never vested in the Constitution. Power never meant to be handled by bureaucrats or officials or committees. We need to change all this. The oath of office should be sworn on the Constitution. In the Capital Rotunda. Among the historicity of remains from past great ages of the United States.

Drones in our night skies. Unelected lawyers interpreting the U.S. Constition. Surveillance. Internet spying. Blackouts and Stasi-like encroachements. Torturing. Deaths and internment of American citizens. Socialization of medicare for the elderly, and healthcare for those in mid-age. Food stamps and deductibles for people who do not work. Taxation over representation. Data-accumulation. Groping at airports. Fumbling and nefarious Justice Department officials. Cronies. Welfare abuses. War and destruction as an industry, like Hollywood and Corporate America! Blame-games. Undermining of basic civil rights. Monetarism-mongering! Unaccountability and state-sponsored fear. Campaigns of division. Solutions disguised for self-created problems.

Mitt Romney’s American Delusion

Republican voters are being put through the pincers. We are back to 2008. Heaps of strong candidates, but no consensus. Great speeches, but no substance. PAC money spent by the millions, but no conclusive results. GOP candidates are even welcoming Democratic voters, to smear each other, to add to their victories, or to just plainly embitter each other. The Republican race is not going to get any more civil. Once, we see these subterfuges, we can ask the real questions: what will it take to unseat Obama in November, and who can best do this?

In America the conservative movement has been changing. Neo-conservatives, who had for roughly two decades (1980-2000) held the strongarm of the party, are gone with the Bush Administration’s doctrine of “pre-emptive strike” and the PATRIOT ACT. We are in the midst of the dregs. Still trying to find out which direction this country will spill it’s spirit of changelessness.

For all his grandeur, Mitt Romney just has not taken his campaign to the next level. Rick Santorum has peaked, but more likely will not hold his miniscule leads. Newt Gingrinch’s populism and Ron Paul’s constitutionalism, so similar to each other, are self-negating. None is in charge. Marginal candidates can’t win delegates, nor the RNC party’s nomination. Mitt Romney, the ever-chameleon like business mogul, can’t strike a human touch to save his life and political prospects.

If Mitt Romney is the front runner of the wolves, ready to flay Obama; what is his version of the American Dream? How does he see this country, through which prism? Is it a legalistic, rigidly technocratic, institutional approach? It seems, his advantage is not his base, his character, anything as much as his warchest. He won’t run out of steam. Even if the delegate count gets close in Tampa, FL this spring; he’ll be able to resurrect himself, make the necessary promises and sail away with the nomination.

Santorum’s Statism Problem

Let us make fresh.

The reason why Rick Santorum would not oust Barack Obama in November, is not his faith. It is simply that he is running a ‘social message’ of uniform decency against a ‘social message’ of uniform healthcare. Plainly, Obama’s health plan, is vital: but not more pressing than the economic calamity of bailouts, frauds, money-laundering, spending and public debt. These are focal issues of the 2012 election.

Santorum is the politician everyone can super-impose themselves on. He’s no CEO like Mitt Romney, no renowned speaker like Newt Gingrich, not intellectual like Ron Paul. No, he is a regular Pennsylvania lawyer, who argued some weird World Wrestling Federation cases. Somehow he is unspectacular enough, that he could almost be your town butcher, postal deliverer or stockyard piler. You would think this is a strength. But it is not.

Eventually, while trying to keep your political pronunciations to a minimum, to correspond to the widest social base possible, you hit a tollboth going 160 mph. Santorum is earnest, he surely is: means well to families and the elderly, but he has yet to prove his salt. His record is plain: he has taken massive amounts of Washington D.C. beltway funding, voted to raise the debt ceiling, is in cahoots with the (so-called) ‘military industrial complex’  and dislikes many anomalies of our population: young pregnants, migrant-labor, jobless, gays, blacks. He has been able to entrench his campaign in an atmosphere of rustic humbleness and simpletonness.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.