New Immigration Policy Bucks the Legal Process - Am I wrong?

After listening to the Obama administration’s plan to give illegal aliens their working papers, I knew I had to think about my response.


According to the administration, those illegal immigrants who have no criminal history, are working, are under 30 years of age, have attended school, are in college or have served in the military are eligible.


Given the administration’s interference with state’s actions to purge illegal aliens from voter rolls, I believe this latest administration move is designed to purposely muddy the voter roll water.


The illegal voter purge should be welcomed by the federal government. That said, why would any American want illegal people, or dead people, to remain on the voter rolls? I can think of a reason.


As you may have heard, Florida’s secretary of state has requested the federal homeland security immigration list to aid in their selection process. Yet the Secretary of State indicated he has not received that list after his request from over a year ago.


So, the administration not only wants to improve their standing among legal Hispanic voters, it wants to receive the votes of illegal residents as well.


Any public office candidate, such as Romney, will be a sitting duck (politically) if he boisterously opposes Obama’s new directive.


Superficially, the new rule seems nice. However, there is a process that should be gone through to arrive at such a policy.


Obama isn’t a dictator. Obama is not supposed to be a Totalitarian ruler. He is supposed to be the holder of the Chief Executive Office of our great Republic. Our Republic is supposed to be a nation of laws, not men. Unfortunately, Obama is usurping more authority than the President is meant to have, and by default, is taking that power from us; from ‘we the people’.


I suppose when ever the President wants to do something, he should be able to do it, without the consent of Congress, right? If the President decides our dissent of his actions is too extreme, he should be able to write a presidential directive that overrides our First Amendment, right?


If the president can write his own laws, pick and choose which laws he follows, and denies the implementation of state’s rights, he is a tyrannical dictator. Regardless of how warm and fuzzy his new policy directives are, if they aren’t arrived at through the process; If they are simpley dictated from his desk, it sets a very bad precedent.


There was a reason our founding fathers wrote the separation of powers into the constitution. It was written in so we’d have checks and balances that would prevent a dictator from coming to power.


It is, therefore, our responsibility to stand against the undermining of the constitution. Don’t look at this as an immigration issue (which it is), look at it as a constitutional issue.


The president is using DHS (in this case) to write laws for him. No congress needed, right?  With the voter intimidation case, charges were dropped.  He went after Arizona over its immigration policy, there is fast and furious, we have national security leaks coming out of the administration,  and a whole list of abuses could be posted.


I pray our congressmen and women stand their ground on the issues and hold this administration accountable.


What are your thoughts.?