Americans Oppose Unilateral Executive Action On Immigration, But Support Immigration Reform
A new poll provides some interesting context to the political context to the President's expected executive action on immigration.
With the President set to announce his plan for some sort of unilateral executive action on Thursday evening via an address to the nation, a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that nearly half the nation opposes the idea of the President acting alone:
Nearly half of Americans disapprove of President Barack Obama’s expected plan to take executive action that would potentially allow millions of undocumented immigrants to stay legally in the United States, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
Forty-eight percent oppose Obama taking executive action on immigration — which could come as soon as later this week — while 38 percent support it; another 14 percent have no opinion or are unsure.
Not surprisingly, these numbers largely break along partisan lines: 63 percent of Democrats approve of Obama taking executive action here, versus just 11 percent of Republicans and 37 percent of independents.
Latinos are divided, with 43 percent supporting the action and 37 percent opposing it. But the sample size here is small (just 110 Latino respondents), so the numbers have a high margin of error.
As NBC News has previously reported, the Obama White House is finalizing a set of proposals to allow as many as five million undocumented immigrants to stay in the country legally, including the parents of children who are American citizens and those with high-tech skills.
These numbers are consistent with the results of a USA Today poll released earlier this week which show that a slightly smaller plurality oppose the idea of the President going it alone on immigration reform in this manner and would prefer to see the President and Congress work together on the issue. As I noted in my post on that poll, this suggests that the President is taking somewhat of a political risk in going forward on immigration reform in this manner, and that Republicans may actually be on the right side of this issue with the public, at least as far as the separation of powers issue goes. As I noted when I wrote about that poll late yesterday, though, it’s hard to predict exactly how the public will react to the President’s proposal when it is made public, which will now apparently occur tomorrow night, and that it was possible that the substance of the President’s new policies will end up being popular with the public as a whole. One potential clue in that regard may lie in other numbers in the NBC/WSJ poll which show broad public support for the specifics of immigration reform:
The new NBC/WSJ poll also finds a majority of Americans (57 percent) favoring a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and that increases to 74 percent when respondents are told that such a pathway requires paying fines and back taxes, as well as passing a security background check.
In June 2013, the U.S. Senate — by a bipartisan 68-32 vote — passed legislation creating this pathway for undocumented immigrants, plus bolstering security of the U.S.-Mexico border.
But the GOP-controlled House of Representatives declined to take up the legislation — or even to pass its own bill.And that is what has spurred President Obama’s decision to take executive action.
The plan that the President will lay out tomorrow night will not be nearly this ambitious, of course, largely because he does not have the legal authority to create anything resembling a pathway to citizenship, or even to legalize in any real sense all of the estimated eleven million people who are in the United States illegally. Instead, the program that he’s is likely to propose is, as I’ve discussed before, likely to be similar to the Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals program that was announced in 2012 and which covers a subset of people who were brought to the United States as children illegally and who meet certain criteria, including the lack of a criminal record and certain age limits. As it stands, that program only covered a certain portion of the people who fall under the definition of people who were brought here as children and didn’t have any choice in whether they came here legally or not, though, and the program is only temporary in that those people who are covered by it must reapply every two years in order to remain eligible for the program and, of course, the program itself could always be rescinded by a subsequent President, or by Congress if it were able to pass a law that eliminated this exemption from deportation and get it enacted into law even notwithstanding an expected veto. The program that the President will propose tomorrow night will, apparently, include an expansion of the DACA program to people not eligible under the original program, as well as DACA-like benefits to others, such as perhaps some of the parents of children who were born here in the United States and are therefore citizens of the United States by virtue of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. The impact of the President’s action, though, will be temporary in the same way that DACA is temporary, and it will not even come close to covering the estimated 11,000,000 undocumented immigrants in the country. At most it is estimated that perhaps 5,000,000 people at most will be able to take advantage of the benefits the President announces tomorrow. That’s a substantial number, though, but it’s not everyone, because the President doesn’t have the authority to impact everyone, it’s only temporary, because he doesn’t really have the authority to grant permanent amnesty and a path to citizenship, and it will do nothing to fix things like the broken legal immigration system. Only Congress can do that.
So, that leaves open the question of how the American public will react to the President’s proposal. Polling such as this, which has been replicated elsewhere, shows that the public is generally oppose the idea of President’s acting unilaterally as he will tomorrow night. At the same time, though, this same polling also shows that the public generally disagrees with the Republican Party’s opposition to things like legalizing the nation’s undocumented immigrants and providing them with a path to citizenship. Polling has also shown that there was broad public support for the DREAM Act, which was the failed legislation that became the basis for the idea of DACA even though DACA is far less wide reaching than the DREAM Act would be. Indeed, notwithstanding the general public attitude toward unilateral executive action, the President has not suffered any real political harm from that program, Remember that that program was announced the summer before the 2012 election, which, of course, the President won handily and there was no indication during that campaign that DACA was any kind of drag on the President’s poll numbers or on how he fared in the election itself.
Obviously, the White House is positing that much the same will happen in response to the policies the President will announce tomorrow, and that the public will ultimately rally around the President in what seems like an inevitable fight over both the substance of the policy and the manner of its implementation with Congress. That may be a correct calculation, in fact I’m willing to bet that it is, but the numbers of Americans we’re seeing who oppose the idea of unilateral action is something that the President should pay some attention to, especially since it’s likely to set off an all-out political war with the new Republican Congress that could have unforeseen consequences for both sides.
Your headline is as misleading as the last one on this topic.
Just admit the split is along party lines…Republicans are against immigration reform.
Stop trying to make this something it isn’t.
After the speech the numbers will shift 5 points toward Obama. <— Prediction.
@C. Clavin:
So you just chose to ignore the fact that 48% of the poll respondents oppose unilateral action and that this disapproval includes both Republicans and Independents?
And that “political war” is totally up to the republicans to wage. If they do, they’re the ones that stand to lose it.
The “all-out political war” is baked in the cake. It really doesn’t matter what Obama does, the GOP will be incensed. I don’t know why that is such a hard concept to understand. Faux independents and moderates can blame Obama, but I don’t give a damn anymore. Better to get the policy right and stop worrying about process. If you really think the GOP is honest in their posturings over immigration, then I don’t believe you are looking at the issue honestly or realistically anyway.
In his first term, all Obama had to do was claim he was a natural-born American citizen to receive the “all-out political war.” It really doesn’t matter; they will find an excuse to wage the war, because it’s a needed part of their political sustenance. Without the war footing, modern conservatism dies.
I’m sure that will be completely different from the comity, sweetness , and light that we have living with since January 20, 2009, when this happened:
I wonder where Doug has been living for the past six years sometimes. the Republicans are already at war with Obama and have been since Day One. The good thing about this excutive order is that Obama seems to have dispensed with idea that he can somehow placate the Republicans with gestures of bipartisanship. Good.
Obama should have done this back in summer. Had he done so, he might have saved Udall in Colorado and Crist in Florida. As it is, he should just do what he feels is right and stop worrying about trying to placate politicans and voters who won’t be placated unless and until he leaves office.
@Doug Mataconis:
I choose math…48% does not justify your headline.
And the article you quote admits it’s along party lines:
On the other hand the American public does, by a large margin, support background checks, increasing the minimum wage, and higher taxes on the wealthy. So can I assume you and your team will be on board?
@Doug Mataconis:
You mean like those “independents” who always vote Republican or Libertarian and never Democratic? Those “independents?”.
In 1863 Lincoln signed the executive order known as the Emancipation Proclamation. Polling at the time showed a sizable percentage against his unilateral action.
What’s most telling about the way the GOP is responding to this threat is that if they really wanted to govern, they’d relax and realize that they could pass something themselves – even after the executive action. If it is good enough there is no doubt in my mind that Pres. Obama would sign a less aggressive bill in the name of more permanent bi-partisan support. However, the GOP appears to be incapable of strategizing for anything other than to demonize President Obama – even if it means they’ll lose in the process as they have proven time and time again. The GOP have no leverage to complain here – the ball is squarely in their court.
@C. Clavin: Everybody around here is opposed to any sort of blanket amnesty, not immigration reform. And the people around here are mainly Democrats.
One idea is to take a new look at the “Dream Act”. There are probably some parts of that could be modified and adapted. There is also the plan of the Evangelical Immigration Table. The plan as shown has no specifics but has an overall framework that could be used. It was developed by a broad base of people. Another idea would be to form an independent committee to come up with some ideas and proposals.
It is clear that people want some changes after what happened last spring.
@LaMont:
So the question is either the Republicans give everything the Obama Administration wants and see themselves destroyed demographically in the future or the Obama Administration does what it wants to anyway and the Republicans are demographically destroyed in the future.
The polling numbers would be much less for immigration if people were asked if they were willing to pay higher taxes and higher housing costs to support amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.
I’m not sure the poll will have been worded well enough to tell us anything useful. Any more, questions about policy probably need to be asked without referencing a specific political party or person. It probably would also need to make it obvious that nothing may be the alternative if they object to the executive action.
@danimal:
Is a policy right if the biggest benefits is that the Democrats will increase their demographic edge in the future but that many middle class and blue collar U.S. citizens will have lower pay, higher taxes, and higher housing costs? If that is the “right” policy, I would hate to see the “wrong” policy.
@Tyrell:
That’s a great list. I could go along with a lot of it.
Please tell me which ones Republicans are willing to act upon?
@superdestroyer:
The question is – Does the GOP want to govern or rather they just pout about it? They set themselves up for the lose lose proposition a long time ago – the policy is popular and long overdo.
And concerning your opinion about what effect immigration reform does on everyone’s taxes, the GOP can pass something to address that too of it were important enough to them. Face it, republicans are not interested in governing – period. And this executive action will potentially expose that notion.
@superdestroyer:
More unsupported nonsense stated as fact.
Who cares how the American public will react? No one even likes the American public, especially the American public.
(FWIW, I suspect that most people in the “American public” will be reacting to a news story they saw/read. They won’t be reacting to the policy.)
There is already an immigration law on the books.
Immigration Law – Sec. 275. 8 U.S.C. 1325
(a) Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Obama’s job is to enforce duly enacted existing laws. The job of amending them belongs to the legislature.
@superdestroyer: The policy that lowers taxes, increases wages and increases living standards is called “immigration reform.” It also improves budget deficits and strengthens Social Security.
Just because conservatives have worked themselves into a lather about the costs of immigration doesn’t mean that there aren’t significant benefits as well.
@Jack:
Yes…I remember you screaming bloody murder when Reagan did the exact same thing.
@C. Clavin:
I wonder if the poll numbers would change if they added that Obama was doing executive orders to protect immigrants “like Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush did.”
I bet there would be substantial change in the poll numbers. Right now most of those 48 per cent think this kind of action is an innovation by the tyrannical Kenyan usurper in the White House. That’s what Fox News and Limbaugh have been no doubt telling them.
@stonetools:
Or if they were asked; “Given that Republicans refuse to act on Immigration, should Obama act on his own if necessary to prevent families from being separated?”
@C. Clavin: I don’t know. I think that the Republicans should get a plan together that some Democrats can go along with and send it to the president. They have the numbers. Be bold, clear, and reasonable. Put the ball in the president’s court. Light a candle, quit cursing the darkness. Show some initiative.
@Doug Mataconis:
Problem is that many people (probably at least 50% of that 48% above) actually think this “Action” is Amnesty, which it is not. It is just a temporary band-aid for a broken unsustainable system. The POTUS knows that no “Real” bill will come from congress on this issue, if there was ever an opportunity then it was back in 2013, as you mentioned. So act now to offer some direction for those who are waiting for that direction so they know they will not be deported and can at least work etc… for the next two years. His promise of action is met, and the ball is in congress court to come up with a bill that does the same, and if they do not by 2016 (and they won’t) Many U.S. citizens who do feel something should be done as a pathway to citizenship, will likely be at those polls voting their belief
@Tyrell:
Hahaha…where have you been?
Republicans are never, ever, going to act.
Given Obama’s really low approval ratings, wouldn’t doing something more than half the country is either in favor of, or at least ok with, be a good thing?
@C. Clavin:
Are you really going to argue that the state tax levels and the costs of family housing in California are not affected by illegal immigration?
@superdestroyer: There are a lot of illegal immigrants in Texas, and it is a dirt cheap state.
And housing in California is only expensive in the places people want to live. If people wanted to live in Texas, there would be high housing prices there too.
@Doug Mataconis: So why is it that GWB is lauded for leading by the courage of his convictions….but Obama is faulted for not heeded polls? Oh, I get it…. IOKIYAW/R
The cynical curmudgeon in me is trying to resist coming to conclusion that some number of Americans (maybe including Doug) don’t want to admit that they are against immigration reform, so they aresaying that they support reform but not unilateral action. Imagining that no one will be able to recognize the disengenuous fence straddle.
I guess the cynical curmudgeon in me just lost the battle. Drat!
@C. Clavin:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/11/no_obamas_amnesty_plan_isnt_anything_like_what_reagan_and_bush_did.html
I do believe you are the most dishonest commenter I’ve seen here in a long time.
@michael reynolds: Why should opinions shift in his favor? His approach is wrong. Rewrite the immigration laws so that they are clear and to the point. No amnesty. Follow the correct path to citizenship or go home. Other countries don’t skirt the law to accommodate law breakers. Neither should we.
@danimal:
The illegal immigrants in Texas and California do not pay their own way. They are a net drain on the government coffers because they need a long list of government services but pay little in taxes. Once again, Progressives push the POV that American citizens are too lazy for manual labor and too stupid for high tech work and must be replaced.
@Doug Mataconis: pretty much, just like he refuses to acknowledge that his version of immigration reform is simply tear down the borders.
@Gustopher:
That is not true because the major cities in Texas are not constrained by the Oceans. The number of whites in California has been going down for years partially due to the mismatch between costs of living, standard of living, and wage levels. Do you really think no one is moving to Texas (a state that added U.S. Congressional Seats in 2010 or to California that did not add any new Congressional Seats in 2010 for the first time in over 100 years. California used to be the place that middle class whites moved (say in the 1950’s) but now is a state where whites are moving out.
@Guarneri:
You link to a radical far right opinion piece based on a radical far right opinion piece to call me dishonest?
Buy a dog, name it Clue, then you’ll have one.
Tom Coburn is now threatening violence because…???
@Robin Cohen:
1. The Republican Congress has had two years to do this . They haven’t done so and show no inclination to do so. No one doubts this.
2. This executive order in no way constrains Congressional action on the issue.
3. Republicans are angry about this precisely because they don’t want to be prompted into action on this issue, because taking action would throw their party into turmoil and show them in an unfavorable light.
The GOP telling Obama that he will “poison the well” by taking a perfectly lawful action is so knee slapping funny it’s difficult to even think about it with a straight face.
Welcome to a new era in Washington …. the politics of Butt Hurt.
He’s a modest proposal, count illegal immigrants as 3/5ths of a person for state representation but don’t let them vote then watch Florida, Texas and Arizona throw open those borders so fast you will feel the breeze in Minnesota.
@C. Clavin:
If you don’t like that the current President is doing what 6 other Presidents have done…invoke your 2nd amendment rights. Tom Coburn:
Violence is probably more effective than Ted Cruz’s Government shut-down….but probably won’t serve Cruz’s Presidential campaign as well.
Let’s review, shall we?
Both Kennedy and Eisenhower did the same thing for Cubans.
Reagan did it for Poles during the Solidarity strikes.
Reagan did it again in ’87 and Bush 41 followed suit…these are the closest analogues to what we expect from Obama.
Bush 43 did it during Katrina.
Clinton very quietly scaled back INS raids after Congress-critters…including conservative members…complained about difficulties immigration enforcement was creating for businesses.
So let’s be honest kids…Republicans are threatening violence and Government shutdowns over something that has not been announced or implemented…but that has likely happened under every single President since 1981.
How is the Republic ever going to survive if half of the political spectrum is insisting on pursuing this nonsense??? Seriously. Do something Republicans. Anything. Just do something besides whine and complain and make threats.
@Tyrell: You mean like this one? “Published: June 27, 2013. Senators approved a massive immigration bill by a vote of 68 to 32 on Thursday. The sweeping legislation includes provisions that will bolster security on the U.S. southern border and offer a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/provisions-in-senate-bipartisan-immigration-bill-revised/
@C. Clavin:
So far as I can tell, what they want to do is foment violent insurrection. You may want to set limits on that “anything.”
@stonetools:
At least that would be interesting. All this crying like little children over nothing at all is getting old.
It will be interesting to see what Hillary has to say about Obama’s action. She will need her best tap dancing shoes to deal with this one.
@Tyrell:
She won’t say anything…there’s no reason for her to tie herself to his policies.
She’ll say something generic about the need for immigration reform…and Republican inaction.
@Tyrell:
Maybe she’ll rightly say that Republicans are grease balls who do not want to get anything done?
See above for this:
@Tyrell:
I’ve heard that HRC is at least toying with idea of running a Hispanic like Julian Castro on the ticket, so I expect Hillary to back Obama’s play without reservation.
I’m sure any Democratic presidential candidate sees a big Hispanic turnout in 2016 as key to their success, so I think they will all back Obama on this.
@stonetools: The one thing we should all agree on is that our current immigration laws are not helping to solve the issue of millions of illegals in this country and delaying action on the problem solves nothing. I would think that Republicans would want to be seen as problem solvers rather than as do nothings. If Obama proceeds with his current plan to give a pass to 5 million, all it does is set a bad precedent. It does not address the problem of homes or jobs for those who get that pass.
@stonetools: I wouldn’t vote for HRC if she were the only one running. Nowhere in her history as a politician does she show ANY quality making her worthy of .my vote AND, from what I read and heard at the time, her last campaign was a disaster AND I sure don’t want slick Willy messing around with anymore interns or other women just because he can.
@Robin Cohen:
I’m afraid you haven’t been on planet Earth these past six years. You need to catch up.
Actually, he would be following Ronald Reagan’s precedent. Ever heard of him?
No immigration reform legislation would. Your statement also begs the question, “Is that actually a problem?”
The Big Dog has weighed in:
So no distance between the current President and the Clintons on Obama’s action.
@stonetools: I have read that Reagan apologized for allowing the illegals a pass. Reagan was wrong and Obama is wrong. Why shouldn’t new immigration legislation require that new immigrants have jobs which will provide money to house and feed them and their families? Why should they expect to receive welfare benefits on our dime? Other nations will only admit new immigrants who have jobs waiting for them or family who will guarantee to support them. Why should we not require the same of new immigrants?
@Robin Cohen:
Why don’t you get back to us when you have a cite from a credible source?
@anjin-san: This was years ago. Let’s say I’m wrong and go from there. Obama’s approach to immigration is WRONG- period. The man screws up everything he does.
@Robin Cohen:
OBL has 3 holes in his forehead that say you are wrong.
Ghadaffi…he’d probably argue with you too.
All the companies in the DOE program…the one that funded Solyndra and made a $5B profit for the taxpayers…probably think you’re wrong.
Certainly Chrysler and GM…who wouldn’t exist today without Obama…would say you’re wrong…and the taxpayers made over $10B profit on the deal.
I’m sure all the financial institutions that were bailed out would say you’re wrong.
Then there are the millions of people who have insurance today that wouldn’t, if not for Obama…and there are Insurance Companies who have millions of new customers.
And now millions of families will be able to stay together rather than being torn apart and deported as the Republicans want.
Pretty damn good track record for a screw-up, I’d say.
@Robin Cohen:
There are also thousands of kids, who aren’t in Iraq fighting the IS right now, that are far happier than they would be if Republican Chicken-Hawks were in charge.
@C. Clavin: I am an Independent. I vote by candidate, not party. We disagree on our perception of Obama. It’s just that simple.
@C. Clavin: And the American taxpayer foots the bill for Obama’s generosity. You have your opinion, I have mine.
@Robin Cohen:
But if your opinion is based on silliness…then your opinion is silly. It’s just that simple.
@Robin Cohen:
And I have read that aliens from Mars invaded England near the turn of the last century. That, however, I understood to be fiction.
Another independent who somehow never votes Democratic, I’m sure. My perception is that such independents are really Republicans who are ashamed of the brand. But we will have to disagree on that.
@Robin Cohen:
Do you own anything of real value? Real estate, stock portfolio? If the answer is yes, how are you doing today as opposed to the day before Obama took office?
@Robin Cohen:
What’s the alternative when the Republican approach to immigration is to send middle aged politicians and journalists to the Mexican border for photo ops with guns?
@C. Clavin: @anjin-san: Rewrite our immigration laws, so that there is no need for amnesty, in fairness to all who apply.
@anjin-san: No change in my situation. Bush AND Obama made mistakes that have affected all of us and neither has been held accountable.
@Robin Cohen:
Of course, as you know, the Senate passed the bi-partisan Rubio-Schumer immigration proposal by 68-32, and Boehner’s House refused to take the bill up at all.
This is not about Bush, not about Obama, this is about Republican non-governance.
@Robin Cohen:
How is that going to happen when it’s time for the 137th symbolic Obamacare repeal vote.
PRESIDENT OBAMA goes ROUGE on IMMIGRATION on 11-20-2014
NAAWP IMMIGRATION UPDATE: Last night PRESIDENT
OBAMA was shunned by all the major
broadcast networks…
… President Obama’s ‘prime time’ address to the
nation – which was aired by dominant Spanish-language channel Univision
viewers, CNN and PBS laid out the new steps he and he alone willing ENFORCING
through ECECUTIVE ORDER will be taking “to fix our broken immigration system.” Obama appeared to be going all-in as he spoke
from Las Vegas, Nevada, the HOMESTATE of PROGRESSIVE LEFT-WING-NUT SENATOR HARRY
REID!
The
REPUBLICAN RESPOMSE was as follows: SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MITCH MC CONNELL had
this to say immediately after PRESIDENT OBAMA laid out his UNILATERIAL
IMMIGRATION POLICY:
“Make no
mistake. When the newly elected representatives of the people take their seats,
they will act,”!
It seems that
PRESIDENT OBAMA has picked a BATTLE that he knows he can’t possibly WIN! According to the UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION a PRESIDENTS DUTY is to UPHOLD the LAWS of the LAND! The
PRESIDENT, nor anyone or any group in the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of our FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT has the AUTHORITY to make LAWS! As a CONSTITUTIONAL ATTORNEY
PRESIDENT OBAMA knows that his IMMIGRATION MANDATE will be IMPOSSIBLE to
ENFORCE! Furthermore, PRESIDENT OBAMA has been a very POOR STEWART of
UP-HOLDING the LAWS as WRITTEN in the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION over the past
6-years. PRESIDENT OBAMA and ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER have been GUILTY of
ENFORCING LAWS that they LIKE and IGNORING LAWS that have been in place for HUNDREDS
of YEARS!
A DEMOCRAT
STRATEGIST immediately responded to the PRESIDENT’s ADDRESS to the NATION by making
the following STATEMENTS:
“PRESIDENT OBAMA needs to start doing sh—
that’s going to energize our base,”
“And these DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS in the HOUSE
and SENATE need to pull their heads out of their asses. We already own the bad,
so let’s get something for all of the good.”
FACT: Over 100
DEMOCRATS in the HOUSE of REPRESENATIVES and the UNITED STATES SENATE have said
that in JANUARY of 2015 they will begin the process of CHANGING POLITICAL
AFFILIATIONS! The GRAND OLE PARTY is expected to begin the IMPEACHMENT PROCESS against
a ROUGE PRESIDENT soon after the new MEMBERS of the HOUSE and SENATE are
SEATED!
FACT: PRESIDENT OBAMA has DESTROYED the
DEMOCRATIC PARTY and now he seems to be COMING AFTER the REST of U.S.!
SECOND THOUGHTS:
OBAMA’s UNILATERIAL IMMIGRATION PLAN SHOCKED the
NATION
CONGRESS and the SUPREME COURT were NULLIFIED during PRESIDENT
OBAMA’s ADDRESS to the NATION last night, as the PRESIDENT laid out his
UNILATERIAL IMMIGRATION PLAN for AMERICA!
Interestingly, PRESIDENT OBAMA does not have the EXECUTIVE, nor the LEGAL
AUTHORITY to make LAWS, nor does he CONTROL the PURSE-STRINGS necessary to
carry out his newly-minted DICATATES!
FACT: This is just another one of PRESIDENT OBAMA’s BOGUS attempts to interject
his NARSISTIC SELF back into the AMERICAN SPOTLITE!
MARK TRAINA is a STAFF WRITER for the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
for the ADVANCEMENT of WHITE PEOPLE
@al-Ameda:
Non-Governance or bias ?
@anjin-san:Many Republicans are against changing the status quo that is in their favor. It scares them. Anything that threatens the status quo is their enemy.
It is a Civil War mentality based on ignorance and fear of the unknown.
@MARK TRAINA:
Cut and paste screeds in ALL CAPS carry about the same weight as people shouting about conspiracy theories on street corners.