According to the Washington Post (and other publications):
Obama readies executive action on immigration
President Obama is preparing to announce new measures that would potentially allow millions of illegal immigrants to remain in the United States without fear of deportation, a politically explosive decision that could jolt Washington just weeks before the midterm elections, according to people who have been in touch with the White House.
Administration officials have told allies in private meetings that both the current surge of Central American children crossing the border and Congress’s failure this year to pass a broader immigration overhaul have propelled the president toward taking action on his own by summer’s end.
Obama aides have discussed a range of options that could provide legal protections and work permits to a significant portion of the nation’s more than 11 million undocumented residents, said Democratic lawmakers and immigrant advocates who have met recently with White House officials. Ideas under consideration could include temporary relief for law-abiding undocumented immigrants who are closely related to U.S. citizens or those who have lived in the country a certain number of years — a population that advocates say could reach as high as 5 million.
What do you think? What message does this send? Is it mainly politics trying to gain Hispanic vote for November? Is it fair? Is it good or bad for America?
Let’s have your opinion.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
My opinion is mixed. On one hand, we have always supported a basic tenet in this country on welcoming people from other lands to flee from oppresion and to welcome immigrants from foreign countries who could develop as productive contriutors to our society. ; this is the basis for many of our own backgrounds as citizens of the USA. On the other hand, these new immigrants are entering the country illegally and will place an economic burden on those communities where they will settle, It is difficult to come down squarely on a viewpoint that clearly points in one direction.
LikeLike
I agree. If it weren’t for immigration I would be in one of six other countries in Europe, but I see a great difference in those who came here in the 19th and early 20th century and the population we seemed obsessed about. Something is wrong and very different when we see our use of language change to accommodate immigrants. At the risk of being accused of racism, I am tired of being asked if I want to be spoken to in English. It’s easier to find someone who speaks English in most European countries than it is in parts of NJ. In addition, we keep talking about immigration reform while what we really means is finding a solution to Mexicans and those from Central American countries flooding our borders. Perhaps if we acknowledged the problem, we could come to agreement on a fair resolution.
LikeLike
.
I just noticed this topic after responding to a similar topic on another forum.
On the other forum a poster said this:
” America’s white population growth is in decline. Without lawful immigration
we would fail to have the growth statistics needed to sustain any kind of
economic growth. ”
This is my reply:
You may be too young to remember back around the 1960s/1970s how
social engineering was on steroids to REDUCE the population of the USA.
Propaganda abounded about how natural resources were running out
and how too many people were polluting the planet… and how the right
thing to do was for the huge white majority of the population to restrict
the number of children to zero population growth. Then there was a
huge push for radical women’s liberation… convincing women to become
career women, not mothers and homemakers. Men and women were
encouraged to wait to marry or not marry at all. The divorce rate went up.
Homosexuality came out of the closet. And in 1973 abortion became legal.
ALL this and more contributed to the baby bust that is being used today
as an excuse to import hordes of immigrants.
You tell me… was that all planned? I think it was.
.
LikeLike
Interesting. I remember those days. Not sure I agree it was planned, but it certainly had an impact on society.
LikeLike
Dick,
I think it is the only policy Obama can use when you have a congress unwilling to make laws. I strongly urge you that if you have not already done so, you read the attached link to Tom Freidman’s interview with Obama from the Sat. 8/9 edition of the NY Times. In it I believe you can understand the frustration of a man who is genuine in his concerns and who is fearful with what he terms the ‘maximalist’ approach and I really believe given this scenario he is governing by stretching his presidential power to the limit. I don’t pretend to be expert enough to know the nuances of legalizing of so many ‘illegal’ folks but I perceive it as a big problem and I also know that it appears as though many of these are the people we see performing the menial tasks so essential to our day to day businesses. If they were all to be deported who would perform the dishwashing, grass cutting and other labor intensive jobs they do? The core unemployed I fear don’t want those jobs and so as I state above I am not at all qualified to answer those questions but if there are in fact 11Million of them out ‘there’ then who will replace their labor?
Here is the link
Bob Bordone
p.s. By the way keep writing your blogs I often don’t agree with you but it keeps me engaged and as such is healthy exercise fior the mind..
_____
LikeLike
I did read the Freidman column. My problem is that Obama’s frustration is an excuse. Other president debt with Congress opposed to them, notably Clinton. I just don’t think Obama has the skills and or is blinded by his ideology to deal with people who disagree with him. He is ineffective because of it and constantly finds scapegoats and others to blame for his shortcomings.
LikeLike
Citizens who do not vote have no right to complain about who is elected. By the same token, a do nothing obstructionist congress has no right to complain about or criticize what the president does in their stead.
LikeLike