In response to
A Moral Question for the GOP
Army Officer (Ret) in Kansas
Friday, August 17, 2012 at 1:09 PM
In response to
The Right Opinion
-
Terrorism Is Never Justified
-
Tom Ridge
-
Boston Bomber Linked to 9/11 Anniversary Murder of Jews
-
Obama's Bloody Recipe for More Benghazis
-
The 'Assassinate Wall Street' Movie
-
First Amendment Clause-Trophobia
-
There's a Fly in My Soup
-
Obama and the Law
-
Liberty, Where Have You Gone?
-
Obama May Survive, but Scandals a Blow to Left
-
Weathering the Politicians
-
When Did We Vote to Become Mexico?
- More Opinion
Policy and Analysis
Our Mission
The Patriot Post's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
More nonsense from Linda. Same-old, Same-old. Let's analyze her points.
1 - "But for most of our history as a nation, we have not barred entry to the U.S. or restricted residency to anyone except those who posed a health, security or criminal risk." Utter nonsense: the U.S. declines FAR more applications for green cards than it accepts every year. If you apply for a residency permit and you are denied (as most are in a given year) you HAVE been barred. But Linda is playing bait-and-switch: although we don't normally deny ENTRY except for the reasons she cited, we DO deny permanent residency without a lengthy legal and administrative process, which is what this is about.
2 - "But sometimes in a democracy, the elected representatives enact bad laws, and the question is what to do about it." Part of her argument here is valid, but permitting the president to simply contravene the law by Executive Order is a far cry from either "Democracy" or the Rule of Law. He's a PRESIDENT, not a king.
3 - "The Dream Act, which was at one time a bi-partisan effort, would have granted these young people legal status..." So what? Did Congress pass it or reject it? If the President now has the authority to issue an Executive Order that creates a law out of any failed bill that had both Democrat and Republican supporters, then we will have completed the creation of a monarchy.
4 - "Conservatives often invoke the principle that no one should be held accountable for wrongdoing that occurred in the past and in which the person in question played no role." But they DID play a role... for years... as adults. As Linda herself wrote earlier in the same article, "Applicants must be 30 years old or under; have come here before the age of 16 and resided continuously for the previous five years." We're not talking about small children being taken to the U.S. and being allowed to stay; this act ONLY applies to people who lived here illegally for at least five years as adults.