• Reply to: What Rightwing Media Gets Wrong about the Reagan and Bush Immigration Orders   4 weeks 19 hours ago

    You're absolutely sure it's unconstitutional? Like, as sure as you would be if you were a constitutional lawyer? Don't you think the President of the United States, who is a Constitutional lawyer, and has a staff of advisors working with him would know if he was acting in contrast to the constitution?

  • Reply to: What Rightwing Media Gets Wrong about the Reagan and Bush Immigration Orders   4 weeks 21 hours ago

    Did you read the article or just skip down to the comments? If you had read the post you would know you are parroting all the other voices who continue to bellow their ignorance of the subject.

  • Reply to: What Rightwing Media Gets Wrong about the Reagan and Bush Immigration Orders   4 weeks 1 day ago

    I have worked as Commercial Seafarer all my days until I retired, and I write these commentaries because I earned my benefits from the government and make no excuse in saying, why are we forever giving freebies to criminal illegal aliens and even our own ‘freeloaders’? These people are here to drain the welfare system, with their ‘Anchor Babies’ and utilizing the ‘Chain Migration’ laws to bring to America their poverty stricken families, when this previous administration don’t look after our own veterans, homeless and mentally disabled Americans.

    This President is no longer represents me, or an overwhelming number of citizens taxpayers and LEGAL residents. He has become a toxic element to the United States Constitution and him and his rebel troops of policial garbage including the main contenders Sen. Harry Reid, Sen. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Barbara Boxer. Other main contenders U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Architect of Obamacare Jonathan Gruber who on camera said the American people are “Stupid”. And I am inclined to agree with this assumption—that Me and You are STUPID, as we fell this for Ponzi Scam, including not as one nation speaking up against the criminal illegal alien invaders?

    In his six years of running this country, he is implicated in so many scandals along with the corruption from his top people. I am not going to list them, but there is so many and instead of representing the people, he is representing criminal foreigners and it’s a incorrigible outrage to hand over our less than secure Social Security cards, so they can—STEAL—jobs, from every American with an emphasis on Black Americans; Hispanic who entered America through the front door will also suffer owing to the infusion of cheap labor.

    Obama doesn’t appear to get the point that he must work with the Congress he has, not the government he wishes. But regardless of Congress and the American people’s resistance to his unilateral action—action the President himself once stated would ‘violate our laws’ and be ‘very difficult to defend legally’—this President people are seeing as a hard core Socialist has decisively to push on alone nevertheless again.
    As President Obama himself said, ‘there are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system’ This President is causing major unrest in American, especially amongst immigrants who have waited years to enter legally. They have paid their dues, so who are these criminal people who violated immigration laws to be given a ‘Free Pass”.
    This President is advised to listen to his own dialog from previous occasions. Our nation is a country of laws, and a Constitution that does not grant the President the power to authorize millions of illegal aliens by signing a document.

    In the eyes of millions of prudent Americans, he has taken the position of ‘KING” as resolute ruler as King John before he signed the Magna Carta at Runnymede, England. It’s like we have become surfs to be spied upon. Not only is this move wrong, but does entirely zero to resolve the underlying problems of our wide open border and immigration system that certain sections could be easily amended through the Congress? In fact, it may intensify the crisis as millions more are likely to storm the Southern border.
    Obamas deed is a key example of Washington distrust.

    He has responded to Congress and the public’s desire for positive change with an all-or-nothing approach that only damages the prospect of future cooperation. My guess their was some beneficial bill placed upon that old decrepit idiot Harry Reid’s desk that didn’t see the light of day that would have qualified for a vote. He did not even endeavor to start the New Year working with the Senate and House on the right foot. THERE WILL BE NO COMPROMISE, ON ANYTHING INCLUDING THE CRIMINAL INVADERS. The funding for this illegal action will be substantial, which will come to the American people in the form of taxes. As if we were not taxed enough now, and in a time we desperately need a consumption or fair tax. Not the current letting millions of people slip through by paying absolutely nothing?

    While House Republicans will still work to do a whole lot so to move the country forward, it is THE PEOPLES commitment and duty to fight this blatant power grab that doesn’t solve the real issues. Don’t sit still on this one outlandish problem fight back and hit the politicians like shrapnel telling your opposition to Obama’s plot to overload our country more with poverty and welfare recipients. Here are the numbers to call and lambaste them to sue Obama or even impeach him. Check this site that includes phone Numbers and Mailing Addresses of Members of Congress contact them at: www.contactingthecongress or direct line to central switchboard at 1-866-220-0044 or 1-800-224-3121.

  • Reply to: What Rightwing Media Gets Wrong about the Reagan and Bush Immigration Orders   4 weeks 1 day ago

    The significant difference is that prior Presidents acted in support of newly passed legislation...President Obama is acting, in his own words paraphrased, to bypass Congress for their failure to act....big, big difference and unconstitutional.

  • Reply to: ALEC and Big Oil Work to Overturn Denton Fracking Ban   4 weeks 1 day ago

    The anonymous "ScottDoug" posted a long-winded comment that is a perfect example of what fracking industry lobbyists say when they pay lawmakers tons of cash and then deceive those lawmakers into harming the public. It's also a perfect example of what citizens say when frackers are paying them to say it.

    Here's what the anonymous "ScottDoug: left out.

    1. Citizens oppose fracking because the companies doing it are permanently ruining the planet and harming its people just for short-term profit. Frackers know that fracking does this, which is why they bought lawmakers at every layer of government, and passed laws to insulate them from responsibility.

    2. The underlying issue isn't mineral rights; it's survival of the planet and its people. Mineral-rights lawsuits may lose, but public water supply lawsuits will win.

    3. The financial incentives for temporary profiteering are far more numerous and far larger than the financial incentives against reckless fracking, so the profiteering incentives cancel and defeat the safety incentives. Taken all together, frackers' overriding financial incentive is to frack quickly and recklessly, without regard to long-term harm for planet and people.

    4. Frackers pay lobbyists to pay lawmakers to pass laws which guarantee that frackers can frack without being held responsible for the harm they do. The anonymous "ScottDoug" wrote --- dishonestly and incorrectly --- that the public water supply gets contaminated not from fracking, but from poor cement. That's a distinction without a difference, because the cement is poured during fracking. So yes, public water supplies are contaminated by fracking well cement. It is scientifically impossible make fracking safe, and frackers refuse to accept responsibility. All the bond logs in the world don't change that.

    5. The anonymous "ScottDoug" wrote --- dishonestly and incorrectly --- that the world must find news oil reserves. That's false. Humanity can abandon dangerous, cheap fossil fuels and replace them with safe, sustainable, renewable energy sources (solar, wind, ocean, thermal). Although temporarily more costly, this approach would guarantee the survival of the planet and its people.

    6. The anonymous "ScottDoug" suggested that frackers should be allowed to pollute the earth's core and surface, merely because citizens might later sue for damages. That's false logic. No citizen should have to sue in court just to keep their water and air safe, their food edible, and their bodies healthy.

    7. The anonymous "ScottDoug" suggested that the absence of lawsuits by frack workers against frackers proves that the process is safe. He's wrong. It doesn't prove anything. In any lawsuit, the average roughneck (like you) has everything stacked against him, and no access to the data that proves his case. The absence of lawsuits doesn't prove that fracking is safe; it just proves that the fracker lobbyists paid enough to lawmakers to pass laws that make lawsuits impossible to win.

    Ned Flaherty
    Boston, MA

Pages