Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

IMMIGRATION: Obama crosses the Rubicon

Letter by Curtis B. Smith, Tacoma on June 19, 2012 at 9:57 am with 52 Comments »
June 22, 2012 4:03 pm

Re: “Obama and immigrants: Dubious path to the right place” (editorial, 6-19).

Your editorial misses the main constitutional issue in President Obama’s immigration edict. Willfully refusing to enforce clearly constitutional law for political ends is a serious abuse of prosecutorial discretion.

Obama crossed the Rubicon on the road to dictatorial rule with the establishment of a mechanism by which people may formalize their exemption deportation. The president is ruling by edict when he grants illegal aliens work permits or status cards in violation of existing law.

The president often cites Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan yet emulates Hugo Chavez. Our legal system is based on precedents. Should Obama’s action stand, we have lost our republic as surely as the Romans lost theirs the moment Caesar brought his legions to Rome.

I am not anti-immigrant or racist. My mother and grandparents were legal immigrants, as is my proudly Hispanic daughter. I merely believe in the rule of law.


Leave a comment Comments → 52
  1. As do most of us. People are walking around in their sleep while this president does exactly what you have described here. It will be our own brainless faults if we permit him to be elected for a second term. I despair over the sleepwalking ignorance of many Americans these days.

  2. BlaineCGarver says:

    The author and Sozo are perfectly correct. If this clown were an “R” I would clammor for his impeachment.

  3. Sonofwashington says:

    Actually the president acted well within his discretionary ability to carry out the law and only implemented a policy that was echoed in a bi-partisan bill (with several Republican supporters) but was filibustered in the Senate by a Republican minority. BTW, several leading Republicans and spokespersons actually favor the policy.

    But I’m curious, if the current president is violating the Constitution in some manner, did you express equal outrage when Geo. Bush happily avoided enforcing laws that constrained corporations and his rich friends on Wall Street, and more importantly, when he made signing statements that “re-interpreted” laws as passed by Congress?

    I find it amazing that there is so much outrage from the right if Pres. Obama oversteps the line (in their opinion) but were silent when Pres. Bush flagarantly abused his powers.

  4. SwordofPerseus says:

    I hear tea bagger sheep bleating the talking points of their masters. Tragic that they have no minds of their own to consider the merits of the decision outside the political three ring circus. Marco Rubio (R) FL basically proposed the same idea but has shelved it until after the November elections, what, politics involved in that decision too!

  5. There is no executive order in any of this. It stems from a legal reduction of prosecutorial effort by the Dept. of Homeland Security whose budget allows for adjustment of where funds should go based on relative importance. Deporting young immigrants who otherwise meet certain citizenship requirements is not cost effective compared to combating illegals who may be a threat to the country.
    The usual extreme right wing ideologues have spoken I see. And as usual the are knee-jerk wrong.

  6. “If this clown were an “R” I would clammor for his impeachment.”

    No you wouldn’t, if you had you would have done it when bush the failure was using your name and mine to torture people, to spy on our fellow citizens and starting 2 wars for no reason.
    If President Obama had an R next to his name you would be cheering and waving th flag like you did while your party destroyed the nation.
    Sad part is, you will do it again.

  7. The move by President Obama was not political, it was not ‘unconstitutional’ it was common sense leadership.
    That you on the right don’t like it and whine is predictable and laughable.

  8. “It will be our own brainless faults if we permit him to be elected for a second term.”

    Yep, when we screwed up and gave bush the failure a second term it cost us dearly.
    If we allow the conservatives to regain control, it will be the end of us all.
    Too bad you brain dead cons can’t see what is right in front of you.

  9. Funny, I though Bush went to congress to authorize war. And in case you have not noticed, BHO is continuing domestic surveillance. Gitmo is still open and harsh techniques got us OBL.

    Try again.

  10. LeePHill says:

    Cite when “Bush went to Congress”.

    Here’s help

  11. Sorry to board for taking the bait. But no one should re-write history.

    Now, back to the subject. Did BHO swear to uphold the law? Is choosing to not uphold the law a violation of said oath?

    We all know it is. This debate is about the admin’s thirst for power and their trashing of the Constitution.

  12. bush the failure didn’t ‘go to Congress’, President Obama isn’t spying on citizens and no one mentioned gitmo.

    Try again and this time don’t ‘re-write’ history.

  13. I see ct7 got a new name.

    She is still 180 degrees out from reality however.

  14. So Patriot Act is good under BHO but bad under Bush?

    Put together an argument Klu. Be better then petty name calling and cut/paste.

  15. menopaws says:

    Why are all Republicans such whiny people???? They are just furious because, once again, they got out-foxed by President Obama….Rubio was going to do the same damn thing—since he has a (R) after his name, you idiots would have been cheering……..Game, set, match—-you snooze you lose……….President Obama did the right thing–the same thing Rubio was going to propose to Congress……HERE’S THE DEAL–YOU AREN’T INTERESTED IN DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR A BUNCH OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE FOR MOST OF THEIR LIVES…….You just want to whine, whine, whine…and blame everything in your life on President Obama………..How many times does the same crowd of people (Grover ,Karl Rove) get to pick your pockets before you learn????

  16. Rubio, Congress. BHO, Executive Branch. Congress makes the law.

    Simple enough for you? Since the ‘enter key’ is lost on you, I understand if you are a little confused.

    Are you mad that BHO waited 3 years to ‘do the right thing’? If it was so important he had to circumvent the system, why wait? Could the polls have anything to with it…

  17. CT7,

    Harsh techniques had nothing to do with getting OBL.

    Executive Orders

    In many ways, presidential executive orders are similar to written orders, or instructions issued by the president of a corporation to its department heads or directors.

    Presidential orders have been issued by EVERY President since George Washington issued the first one in 1789.

    Presidents typically issue executive orders for one of these purposes:

    1. Operational management of the executive branch.
    2. Operational management of federal agencies or officials.
    3. To carry out statutory or constitutional presidential responsibilities.

    Thirty days after being published in the Federal Register, executive orders become law.

    While they do bypass the U.S. Congress and the standard legislative law making process, no part of an executive order may direct the agencies to conduct illegal or unconstitutional activities.

  18. bobcat1a says:

    Why did none of these newborn constitutional purists not fulminate when Bush issued his many signing statements declaring his intention to ignore laws?

  19. Dang, I wish all y’all would come up with some ideas for solutions that could be presented to Congress and/or our state legislators instead of hating and hiding under fake names and irrelevant issues.

  20. sozo – we are already screwed by who the Dem/Repub Party has put up for nomination. Vote NONE OF THE ABOVE. The Parties and their Money Interests won’t allow a candidate who will truly challenge the status quo. Voting for the lesser evil only supports a continuation of this non-democratic (small “d”) “representation”.

  21. menopaws says:

    Ct7—–Our President must just sit and laugh at your conservative morons……….Today the Bloomberg poll has him up 13 points over your rich little prep school politician………People like him because he is a pleasant, smart man……And they RESPECT him……..May not agree with everything he does, but ultimately, respect is something no amount of money in attack ads can buy……Get a clue–the voters are laughing at Republicans these days……..Too mean and tooo stupid……When you find a candidate who isn’t an empty suit–get back to us……

  22. We found an empty suit, he sits in the Oval Office as we speak. This dude has no clue on how to be president. He should go back to the streets of Chicago where maybe he can help reduce the mayhem with his “charm”.

  23. xring,

    Thanks for posting the facts. AS you know, facts trump wrong-wing bloviation every time.

  24. aislander says:

    …and the lefty flash mob convenes.

    “Mob” seems apt…

  25. billybushey says:

    The cons are conveniently overlooking that before this prosecutorial discretion was sanctioned, the administration had conducted 396,000 deportations and increased the Border Patrol to 20,000 agents. So the president IS enforcing the law.

    Also, the discretion is very narrow and well defined, not a broad “blank check”. As to solutions, does anyone notice that while the Tea Buggers are for giving everyone guns on the border and building a (very expensive) 30 foot fence along 1500 miles of border in order to hurt and/or kill the Great Enemy (brown people), the Tea Bag puppet masters are making no move to enforce or increase punishment of business that hire and landlords that rent to undocumented aliens? If they did, it would end wage suppression and increase union membership. It’s all about the appearance to keep the enthusiastic but relatively uneducated Tea Bag Division foot soldiers placated.

  26. This letter claiming Obama has crossed the Rubicon really jumped the shark.

    Explain again how Obama “emulates Hugo Chavez”…

  27. for comparison:

    Administration of George W. Bush (2001-2009)

    Disposition of Executive orders signed by President George W. Bush:

    * Subject Index

    * 2009 – E.O. 13484 – E.O. 13488 (5 Executive orders issued)
    * 2008 – E.O. 13454 – E.O. 13483 (30 Executive orders issued)
    * 2007 – E.O. 13422 – E.O. 13453 (32 Executive orders issued)
    * 2006 – E.O. 13395 – E.O. 13421 (27 Executive orders issued)
    * 2005 – E.O. 13369 – E.O. 13394 (26 Executive orders issued)
    * 2004 – E.O. 13324 – E.O. 13368 (45 Executive orders issued)
    * 2003 – E.O. 13283 – E.O. 13323 (41 Executive orders issued)
    * 2002 – E.O. 13252 – E.O. 13282 (31 Executive orders issued)
    * 2001 – E.O. 13198 – E.O. 13251 (54 Executive orders issued)

    291 Total Executive orders Issued – Averaging 36 per year

    Bush issued over 750 signing statements

    Administration of Barack Obama (2009-Present)

    Disposition of Executive orders signed by President Barack Obama:

    * Subject Index

    * 2009 – E.O. 13489 – E.O. 13527 (39 Executive orders issued)
    * 2010 – E.O. 13528 – E.O. 13562 (35 Executive orders issued)
    * 2011 – E.O. 13563 – E.O. 13596 (34 Executive orders issued)
    * 2012 – E.O. 13597 – E.O. 13615 (19 Executive orders issued)

    127 Total Executive orders Issued – averaging 32 per year.
    Obama has issued 18 signing statements as of as of June 4, 2011.

  28. “So Patriot Act is good under BHO but bad under Bush?”

    Who said anything like that?
    Looks like you need to ‘put together an argument’ and not a straw man this time ct180.

  29. “…and the lefty flash mob convenes.

    “Mob” seems apt…”

    And a********er, when you on the right do worse…..what do you call that?
    Hypocrisy, thy name is a********r.

  30. Meno- “prep school”? Where did BHO go to school? Just because he was a pot head and a poor student he gets a pass. Nice lib logic.

    All voters should demand more of the office then what we have today. Empty suit is a polite term.

  31. BlaineCGarver says:

    Libs don’t have a Klu about the constitution. Everything Bush did was legal and constitutional, and approved by congress, and Obozo can’t say the same of his little stunts, especially this last one.

  32. Scottc51 says:

    Obama does the “right” thing when he is cornered into it. He was going to get beat by Rubio’s legislation so he jumped first. He was on the evolutionary way towards gay marriage when Joe Biden shamed him into it. Consistently leads from behind.

  33. averageJoseph says:

    Good observation Scott.

  34. BGC – there are 291 Bush executive orders, and 750 signing statements that say you are wrong.

  35. And how many are needed to prove 1 is illegal? All of the previous ones are in the past. A dem congress came and went. Today’s actions are wrong, nevermind opposite of the campaign. Correct?

  36. And how many are needed to prove 1 is illegal?

    Making an assertion and then re-asserting that assertion in slightly different language as proof of the original assertion is circular logic.

    You say that Obama’s action was illegal. Provide actual proof beyond restating your belief that it is illegal.

  37. averageJoseph says:

    LOL, how many lefties are STILL restating claims about Bush/Cheney illegalities?

  38. averageJoseph says:

    Let me guess with out clicking the link… a truther?

  39. averageJoseph says:

    “You say that Obama’s action was illegal. Provide actual proof beyond restating your belief that it is illegal.”

    You don’t have to believe CT7… here it is in Barry’s own words…

    When pressed by Hispanic groups to enact the law (Dream Act) by executive order, Obama stated that it would be illegal.

    “Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. … But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

  40. Let me guess with out clicking the link… a truther?

    The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.

    Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President’s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country’s foremost experts on National Security.

  41. Wouldn’t be the first time a brilliant man has lost his mind.

  42. “When pressed by Hispanic groups to enact the law (Dream Act) by executive order, Obama stated that it would be illegal.”

    Civics 101: There’s difference between making laws and enforcing them.

  43. bB, are you pimpin’ for truthers now?


  44. Speaking of differences:

    Noun 1. civics – the social science of municipal affairs
    social science – the branch of science that studies society and the relationships of individual within a society

    Noun 1. American Government – the social science of the structures, processes and issues of national, state and local government

    Now which one would be applicable?


  45. CT7 – Obama’s latest EO is not illegal, and whether or not it was a campaign issue is irrelevant.

    AJO – Obama’s latest EO has nothing to do with the Dream Act which you are trying to use as strawman.

    clamat0 – what would be appropriate is for you to use a correct definition.

    civics [ˈsɪvɪks]

    1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the study of the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

    2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) US and Canadian the study of government and its workings.


  46. x, you just posted the same definitions – different wordings – of the terms.

    Thanks for your endorsement!

    Now, for the benefit of the ill-informed, kindly explain to the class the differences between the two studies.

  47. aislander says:

    xring: You are so cute when you try to patronize!

  48. Nope – I responded to aJ’s taunt LOL, how many lefties are STILL restating claims about Bush/Cheney illegalities?

    by posting a recent story I saw on a LIBERTARIAN, RON PAUL SUPPORTING site.

    I was demonstrating that the most recent claim I had seen about Cheney’s illegalities was on a LIBERTARIAN site.

    But….when it comes to the truther pimping putdown….I do find it interesting that so many of you don’t believe anything the government says except when it comes to matters of National Security (except, of course, when you have to be pat down to enter a plane) – then anyone who dares question the official conspiracy theory put down by the Government is a loon……

    Not convinced of any conspiracy theory – including the one put forward by the Government.

  49. Sorry ClamatO – I am not supporting you.

    First, my definitions show that definitions are wrong.

    Second, those minor differences are really not so minor.

    Aislander – have you re-defined yet another term.

    If you really need an example of patronizing just read any of your response when I and others have shown your statments to be false.

  50. ‘that your’

    Your definitions read like college course descriptions.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0