The current immigration law is not Obama's...

TODAY’S IMMIGRATION PROBLEMS

What’s the Reality?

William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which passed the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

In fact, desperate Central American parents are exploiting separate legal loopholes in American border security passed before Obama took office.

Unaccompanied minors fall under the bipartisan law, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which passed the House and Senate unanimously and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

That law says the children cannot be sent back. They must instead be held humanely by the Department of Health and Human Services until the courts release them to a “suitable family member” in this country.

The child “shall be promptly placed in the least restrictive setting that is in the best interest of the child,” the law stipulates. “Placement of child trafficking victims may include placement in an Unaccompanied Refugee Minor program … if a suitable family member is not available to provide care.”

Immigration reform is picking up steam in Congress.

This law is the most current law with which the administration can work. The President must enforce this law although he has some  leeway through Executive actions as to how the Executive agencies (Homeland Security) follow the law.

There have been attempts to reform the immigration policy.

On Monday (24 June 2013), the “Gang of Eight” immigration reform bill was put to the test. The bipartisan effort proved to have support in the Senate, passing on a 67-27 vote. While the bill’s backers were looking to win 70 votes as a symbolic win, this is still a victory for the proposal holistically.  

http://mic.com/articles/51173/immigration-reform-2013-the-senate-passes-a-bill-and-the-house-trolls-the-senate

John Boehner, Speaker of the House, has prevented a vote in the House on this Senate Bill.

I find it interesting that people are blaming President Obama for following the law of the land.  Reform has been approved by the Senate, but is being blocked by Speaker Boehner.

If some of you have problems with the way the President is following the current law you need to contact your Representatives and urge them to vote on the reforms.  Only Congress has the ability to write and make laws.

What's wrong with these people?

Attention Murrieta, CA demonstrators:

I don’t understand your fear of the women and children arriving from Mexico and Central America. It’s not like they are going to take over the state, take all the jobs, take food stamps or swamp the welfare system.  

California has more white people on food stamps than hispanic. When Hispanics and Latinos arrive in the US, they are looking for jobs to support their families.  They tend to take jobs that no self-respecting white person would take, so there is no loss to the whites.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

CALIFORNIA

Population estimate, 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38,332,521

Percent, white (73.7%)  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  -  28,251,067

Percent, Hispanic or Latino (38.2%) - - - - - - - - 14,643,023

FOOD STAMP RECIPIENTS

 White (43%) - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16,485,123

Hispanic (19%) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  7,238,178

http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/10/everything_you_think_about_foo.html

The Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program provides food stamps for almost 47 million Americans. Of those 47 million people, 43 percent of them are white and 33 percent are black. Approximately 19 percent are Hispanic, 2 percent are Asian and the remainder are Native America. 

THE FIRST AMENDMENT

Article [I]¹³

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; 

The Constitution makes no mention of Christ or Christianity. It speaks of religion, period. One can believe that Jesus was raised from the dead or one can believe that a golden statue represents one’s deity. Each of us has our own belief system.  No one has the right to say that one is better than the other. This is the beauty of our Constitution.

or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; 

Freedom of Speech and the Press is vocalizing or penning one’s opinion. Our Supreme Court has ruled that spending money is a form of free speech.

This decision causes me pause. If money is considered free speech, the Supreme Court decision shows favor to those with money versus those without.

A person with no money has the same right to stand on a soapbox on the corner and say almost anything he/she wishes. The billionaire can stand on a soapbox right next to the other and voice an opposing opinion. This is freedom of speech.

The person with no money cannot speak freely if money, instead of speech is the currency.  The billionaire can speak  freely if money, instead of speech is the currency.

This Supreme Court decision diminishes the freedom of speech for everyone except those who can pay.

or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,

Peaceably indicates without weapons or a means to cause harm.

and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Supreme Court decision also diminishes the ability of the average American access to the Government. Each of us certainly has the ability to contact our Congressional representatives via mil, email, or telephone.  You nor I have the wherewithal to knock on our representative's office door to voice our grievance in person. Lobbyists have the money and power to knock on that door and be admitted.

How many of us have the monetary backing to take a grievance to court?

Do you have control over your body?

Hobby Lobby v Burwell

I wonder why the Fourth Amendment was not brought forward in this case. Not being a legal scholar and using only common sense, it appears to me that Hobby Lobby unreasonably searched and seized it’s employees persons.

If a person cannot be secure in their personal health decisions without unreasonable interference, their Fourth Amendment rights have been violated.

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT

Article [IV]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

taking a 19 second clip from a longer speech...

I realize that we aren't always on the same political page. That's ok and I accept the differences in opinion we may hold. I recently received an email quoting Obama as saying:  

“Ordinary men and women are too small minded to govern their own affairs.  Order and progress can only come when individuals surrender their rights to an all powerful sovereign.”

Even I, in my liberal minded brain found this statement upsetting. I chose to research it further.  After an hour of research I found the speech in it's entirety. The quote was  certainly taken out of context and the meaning was upsetting.

I know that my opinions will not affect those of you on the more conservative side of politics, but I hope that this example will provide insight as to how we interpret NEWS.  Again, I admit my political bent, but I attempt to see both sides of a subject without accepting one viewpoint.

This attempt at confusing an issue and making a point to make Obama look tyrannical is a blatant move to LIE to the American people.

Please take the time to watch both clips.  One includes the full context of the speech, the other, a statement taken out of context to promote a political view.

I realize that politics is a dirty game where the players will use any method to win. This edited clip blatantly indicates a lack of integrity. Those who listen to this clip without knowing the context of the speech will arrive at a FALSE conclusion.

Regardless of one’s political opinions this video clip proves how far and how low politicians will go to win. I HAD to search for the entire speech to form my own opinion.  How many out there will take this video clip as gospel?

This is the link to the entire speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVZWLqkBtf0

This is the link to the edited clip:http://youtu.be/YfRtbIQ1kTw