Thread: Obama's Slippery Slope Gone: blanket Amnesty all illegals

Obama is seriously considering a blanket Amnesty for ALL illegals in the country

The Obama Slippery Slope is Gone and it’s Day 563 of Our Captivity

By Sher Zieve
Tuesday, June 22, 2010

The slope is no longer slippery, folks. In fact, the slope is no longer visible. We-the-People are already tumbling head over heels down the mountainside. And said mountainside is Mt. Everest.

For those of you who are still unaware, we are already living in and under the Obama Tyranny. You may have missed it but, you and we were forced over the cliff’s edge with ObamaCare; which was passed by Dictator-in-Chief Obama with the full knowledge and gleeful demeanor that he was forcing it against the will of the American people. After the first poison pill was shoved down our throats, there was nothing to stop The Obama. He got away with it the first time and will now rule everything in true tyrannical fashion—without the need of a pesky legislative or judicial branch and certainly not the opposition votes from an increasingly aware US electorate.

It was announced yesterday the Obama is seriously considering a blanket Amnesty for ALL illegals in the country. He plans to affect it via Executive (make that “Tyrant“) Order. In that way, he can overturn the 2010—and most certainly the 2012—elections before they even occur. We-the-People are now completely irrelevant. Regarding ObamaCare, Seniors are now being summarily dropped from care or refused treatment by their doctors who can no longer afford to treat them. And if there is still a November Miracle and the Marxists are removed from power, Democrats have already announced that they will employ a scorched earth policy and pass Cap & Trade which will bankrupt each and every one of We-the-People!

Aren’t these the treasons against the people that precede real revolutions? Folks, we have finally been backed into a corner with no way out but to fight. Still think we can last until November? Do you?

President Considers Executive Order for Blanket Amnesty for Illegal Aliens: http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/p ... s_06222010

Doctors refusing or removing patients from the Medicare program: http://www.techjackal.net/other/2010/06 ... e-probram/

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/24567

[quote="AirborneSapper7"][b]Obama is seriously considering a blanket Amnesty for ALL illegals in the country

www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/presiden ... gal-aliens

I think the first three letters after "www" pretty much explains it all!!!

Limited recourse if this happens:

Recourse
If Congress does not like what the executive branch is doing, it has two main options. First, it may rewrite or amend a previous law, or spell it out in greater detail how the Executive Branch must act. Of course, the President has the right to veto the bill if he disagrees with it, so, in practice, a 2/3 majority if often required to override an Executive Order.

Congress is less likely to challenge EOs that deal with foreign policy, national defense, or the implementation and negotiation of treaties, as these are powers granted largely to the President by the Constitution. As the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, the President is also considered the nation's "Chief Diplomat." In fact, given national security concerns, some defense or security related EOs (often called National Security Directives or Presidential Decision Directives) are not made public.

In addition to congressional recourse, Executive Orders can be challenged in court, usually on the grounds that the Order deviates from "congressional intent" or exceeds the President's constitutional powers. In one such notable instance, President Harry Truman, was rebuked by the Supreme Court for overstepping the bounds of presidential authority. After World War II, Truman seized control of steel mills across the nation in an effort to settle labor disputes. In response to a challenge of this action, the Supreme Court ruled that the seizure was unconstitutional and exceeded presidential powers because neither the Constitution or any statute authorized the President to seize private businesses to settle labor disputes. For the most part, however, the Court has been fairly tolerant of wide range of executive actions.

http://www.thisnation.com/question/040.html