This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

The Man Who Would Be King--Obama and Immigration

Readers have asked us to post on the president who has anointed himself as king.  I have been a little slow here as I knew it would be difficult to keep commenters focused on the real issue of presidential overreach.

Both Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio have cautioned us that when discussing the immigration issue we conservatives have not watched our tone.  Thus we are not convincing legal Hispanics that we have nothing against them.  For reasons I do not understand, Hispanics seem to have chosen to identify themselves with the illegals and not with their fellow Americans.  Addressing the problem of illegals is like Jesus’ parable about the wheat and the weeds having intertwined themselves so much that pulling out the weeds could pull out the good wheat. 

Anyway, readers, watch your tone in discussing this post.



NewGuy said...

It would seem to me that, even if you are somehow in favor of amnesty for illegals, you still must be concerned about this president, or any president, deciding what laws he will enforce. His oath was to uphold the laws of the United States...not to issue instructions selectively choosing some laws to enforce and putting others into a "let it slide" category.

This is a purely political move designed to bait Republicans into opposing him and thus, by extension, opposing those "good immigrants" who were dragged into this country as children and have contributed to the USA. To me, it isn't a matter of whether or not they should stay (THEY SHOULD NOT!) but is instead, a constitutional question. We did not coronate a king - we elected and inaugurated a president who is supposed to UPHOLD our laws. It is congress' job to pass the laws!

If I commit a crime - say a robbery - and give the money to my minor children who later grow up, graduate high school and perhaps serve in the military, does that entitle them to keep the money? That's what Obama is saying here!

Blogger said...

I am about to break my own caution about tone. That room appears to be full of people who could have fled from banana republics with tin horn dictators. Now they are trying to egg this man on into becoming exactly what they or their families ran away from. That is mind boggling. Some people can be just plain nuts.

guy faulkes said...

Obama's usurpation of the powers of Congress and his violation of his oath of office to enforce the laws of the United States constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. The impeachment process should begin at once.

After all, Obama has already admitted he did not have the power to make such an executive decision.

Wolf' Head said...

If the president and other government officials refuse to obey the Constitution, why should we obey their laws?

(Other than the threat of force)

Blogger said...

Listen to the crowd. Obama says he wishes he could be a dictator but our constitution won't let him.

They respond "Yes you can! Yes you can! Yes you can!

Somebody please tell me these aren't the same people who we are told will decide our next election.

NewGuy said...

I have to share this from one of my favorite politcal cartoonists...Lisa Benson!