Shared publicly  - 
Both sides say President Obama's decision to stop deporting young, otherwise law-abiding illegal immigrants could have an affect on the general election. Republican Mitt Romney called it a weak "short-term" approach to a big problem, but did not say he'd reverse the directive if elected.
Bonnie Lu's profile photoArun Kumar's profile photoReverand Eagle's profile photoJeff Buderer's profile photo
Thank you +NPR Politics for stating the obvious. Why do you think he did it if not to try to bolster Latino support.
that was a smooth move of obama.....politics at all
and from the posts I have been reading by legal looks like it is going to help Romney.
The only way Willard the ugly Romney wins is with money and lies... so... let's make sure he loses.
Do you liberals really know how ignorant you sound? Republicans do not believe in rewarding law breakers..It is very hard to be a conservative because we have values and principals.....unlike the Democrat liberals who believe it is ok to break the law... They will not say what needs to be said ....just to be elected.
+Bonnie Lu Are you aware that Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to illegal immigrants in 1986?  Reagan is the only president having done so.  Do a google search "Reagan amnesty 1986" and you can read about it.  Get your facts straight before you blurt your nonsense in public forums.  
Need I say more about this Human President of the U.S.A.?
If we look at a lot of the immigration laws they are the result of a very bureaucratic mindset. If we were to take this idea of the global economy seriously we would gradually open the borders and slowly eliminate mindless and dehumanizing regulations that keep people from experiencing other cultures. If you want to stop the unsustainable flow of people across the borders you need to control human numbers and also address the massive and unprecedented gap between the haves in the West and have nots in the developing world.
Arun Kumar I am absolutely aware of what Reagan did and was predicted would not work. And obviously it hasn't. Here we are again, 12 million illegals later. As for your attack on me for stating opinion, I will take it, as the left have no other defence. Even the media reports, proudly, I might add, that this was done for political reasons. I have read many responses from those who are working to get in here the legal way and those who are here the legal way...and they are just as angry by the unfairness of this as well.
+Bonnie Lu Bonnie, Go back and read your earlier post.  You said that "liberals have no morals / principles, while conservatives are full of them that they don't break laws."  Really!  Unless you have selective amnesia, Reagan, who is someone deified in the Republicon party, is a "law breaker" who "does not have morals and principles" because he granted amnesty to illegal aliens.  Do you agree with that?  I expect a "Yes" from you.  Yes, life is never fair.  Deal with it and move on.  Obama is not grating citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, but merely giving them some peace of mind so that they can stay in this country for no fault of theirs.  They are contributing as much to this country as you and I are, so why not give them that basic dignity.  You want to treat them as 3rd grade people, animals, while I want to give them some basic dignity.  In fact, Marco Rubio (a great rising Republicon) has a version that is exactly similar to Obama and grants citizenship to those children.  I don't know where the politics comes in.  So, your facts are all wrong and opinion has big logic gaps.  Sorry!
As I said, and you continue to ignore, I used no facts. I stated opinions. Reagan was told then, sorry to have to repeat myself, but you do seem to be having a problem reading, that amnesty would not work----- again, it has not! Rubio said this is a short term fix for a long term problem! And we all know why thos was done at this time! Rubio's dream act---cannot be exactly similar! Thats impossible! Exact and similar?
I don't know why you don't understand that "Obama is NOT offering amnesty and granting them citizenship" to the illegals.  He is merely allowing the children of illegal aliens to continue doing what they are doing.  Yes, Bonnie, Rubio's dream act grants citizenship to the children of the illegal aliens, whereas Obama does not.  Obviously you have not read the Dream Act or Rubio's proposal as you have no idea what you are talking about.  In a public forums, if you don't get your facts straight, you will be crushed.  Opinions are alright as along as they have some "factual" basis.  You obviously don't.  
+Arun Kumar 
Arun as to are a few...and in that good old bastion of truth...The NY Times   4/26/12

Mr Rubios compromise version of the Dream Act  Now if you would like to EXPAND your KNOWLEDGE you can google this and read the article thoroughly.

Recognizing that his proposal was never going to be an easy sell for either Republicans or Democrats, Mr. Rubio said in an interview this week that he was moving forward with his plan to give students a chance to study and work here legally, albeit temporarily. 

The compromise would grant students who are the children of illegal immigrants a new kind of nonimmigrant visa that would let them live in this country legally for a period of time. They could work, drive and pay taxes. He would also grant nonimmigrant visas to the graduates of colleges and trade schools, enabling them to stay here and work.
The proposal would not grant them green cards, giving them permanent residency, which sets it apart from the original Dream Act. With their nonimmigrant visas, they could seek green cards in the traditional way, either through marriage, family or an employer. But they could remain in this country legally during that process.
+Bonnie Lu Great!  You have now graduated from talking your "opinion" to talking about "facts".  Read what you wrote just now and what you wrote in your earlier comments.  You accused liberals of having no morals / principles whereas conservatives like yourself do because they don't reward law-breakers.  Now you are citing Rubio's proposal as an example here.  So, what do I make of your "moral / principle" comment?  ok, leave that aside for now.

Having cited Rubio's proposal, would you agree that Obama's friday announcement was even "milder" than Rubio because Obama is not granting any non-immigrant visa to the children of illegal aliens.  So, how is Obama acting politically when he is doing exactly (if not milder than) what your conservative icon Rubio is proposing and that you cite here?  Is it wrong for you just because Obama is proposing it while it's ok for the high conservative moral and principles if a Republicon Rubio proposes the exact same proposal?   Come on, to me that is hypocrisy.  
Arun you simply do not get it.. As I said we do NOT believe in rewarding law breakers. By that of course, if you do not twist well...I mean we do not allow amnesty to illegals...and you know exactly WHY the Dream Act was proposed by the Democrats in the first place, it was because their Amnesty bill failed...and as it turned did their Dream Rubio wanted to propose an that did NOT grant citizenship...I don't see how you cannot understand the difference, in pandering to a group of voters...vs actually trying to help of group of people to get on the RIGHT side of the law. 
+Bonnie Lu Your assertion that the sons / daughters of illegal aliens are indeed illegal is plain nonsense and illogical.  It is akin to saying that the sons / daughters of people convicted of murder are also murderers.  Is it fair for the law to judge the sons / daughter of murderers when the former have not committed any crime?  I don’t think so.  When these kids came to this country, they were brought in illegally by their parents – blame the parents, not the kids.  Now, you want to punish those kids who have spent their entire life in this country as law abiding citizens.  Imagine that you graduated from high school (17 yrs old) and now you are deported to Guatemala to start over there.  That is plain inhumane.  Are we living in the USA or USSR?

Also, where did I say that Obama will give "amnesty" to illegals?  We are talking about Obama's Friday announcement, not Dream Act.  I support the Friday’s announcement but you are illogically mixing up Friday’s announcement with Dream Act.

Regarding the Dream Act, it was proposed by Richard Lugar (R) and Dick Durbin (D).  Also, the path to citizenship had the support of George W Bush administration.  

I really don’t know what you are arguing about conservative vs. liberal.  You hate liberals so you are making nonsensical claims.  Tell me, do you want to punish your own kid for a murder that you committed?
+Bonnie Lu You have not said a single word about what Reagan and republicans did with their amnesty  Can you care to comment on that before we go anywhere?

I want you to say publicly that Reagan and his republicans were pandering to a group of voters.
+Arun Kumar If these people are NOT illegal...please explain to me why they have just been granted temporary repreive for being illegal? Geezzzzzzzzz  What do you NOT understand about NOT rewarding...the breaking the LAW? If I took my children, illegally into a country, I guess I would understand that I am illegal...and I am threatening my OWN children...Would you have us deport just the parents? Break up families?
+Arun Kumar  As NPR says...."President Obama outlined a new policy Friday to temporarily stop deporting some young illegal immigrants." which is a misnomer...they are illegal aliens. but who am I to quibble?  
+Arun Kumar  this is at least the 3rd time..I have posted this..." I am absolutely aware of what Reagan did and was predicted would not work. And obviously it hasn't. Here we are again, 12 million illegals later." 
I think that is the least of our problems at this time when the world's major economies are in deep trouble.
+Bonnie Lu Would you agree that Reagan was pandering to a group of latino voters? Because you accused Obama of that. I don't care whether that policy would work or not....just the fact you called democrats pandering and I expect the same treatment meted to the Reagan and republicans. Do you agree that Reagan pandered to a group of voters?
I will not concede that Arun as it was not the case at all, even the media at the time did not charge him with that, and the media very pointedly is saying that now in this case. Beside it was 1986...and he certainly did not need he was NOT running...and plenty of Republicans opposed this law as well
Arun, Bonnie is not going  to concede, because she just hates every body but Republicans.  I am an independent voter, do not care for R/D party, but she is putting hypocritical arguments about this.  Arun, you can take a horse to a water pond, but you can not him drink the water.  Just stop having any logical conversation with her.  
Obama's finally showing his true colors(no pun intened),next thing you know if your not rich he'll raise taxes so high just the middle class will have to pay them.But the big secret is how Pres.Brown will take all our guns and any other weapon away from,the middle class.
Electing him President was the biggest goof in American history.
+Reverand Eagle Eagle, are you by any chance a millionaire? Because, paying 15 percent tax on multimillion income and asking the common man to pay 20% is plain immoral. Following republican view is going to destroy this country and cause for another revolution by the common man. So stop saying ignorant things when Obama is trying to provide a leg for the common man to stand on. Wormney will surely destroy this country if he is elected. Obama is not perfect, but Wormney is far from it.
There is no way on this earth that +Reverand Eagle could be a millionaire.  +Reverand Eagle  is just a racist redneck living in substandard housing somewhere and Yes, he does have a church where he molests the little boys and girls (and probably the women in his congregation too).  

The reason that +Reverand Eagle is worried about his guns is not to defend himself from anyone, it is to harass "Brown" people and kill himself when the FBI finally catches up with his sexually deviant and murderous orgy.

Tell me I am wrong +Reverand Eagle
+Dewan Haque Thanks.  I thought people would look at facts and make informed decisions.  Obviously, Bonnie Lu started off with "opinions" and finally I moved her closer to looking at "facts". She like most conservatives are confused and obsessed with anti-Obama anything.  I really want politicians to do what is right for the country.  I don't like all of Obama's policies, but the fact that that man is decent enough to try to have a decent political dialogue is commendable.  Yes, we need to control deficits, government spending, and debt.  No one disagrees, but how you do that is the big question.  Should we tax the middle class more and allow millionaires to pay a lower tax?  Every economic theory says that trickle down effect has not worked (no net jobs created during George W Bush 8-yrs) and we want to give another permanent tax cut.  As Obama says, the deadlock in Washington needs to be broken so the country can move forward...whether we move forward with Obama or otherwise is up to the people to decide.
 +Arun Kumar  I started off with opinions...based on facts...which you consistently want to ignore.....and simply refused to understand....
this stradigy is called "the only way I can stay in office"
Yes, let us vote for the Saint Romney as he is the only politician who will not say anything to get elected.  
Arun I am not a Romney fan, but I tell you this, his policies will NOT destroy the economy. He will promote growth, not stifle it. This man you seem to defend at all costs is destroying main street america. Wall Street and DC Street are the only things that are expanding. We must stop the power grab!
or we can vote for obama, who will do anything to stay in office.
Romney can promote growth, but that doesn't mean it will happen. There is not enough consumer confidence. I hardly buy anything anymore that I absolutely don't need and I don't see that coming back ever again.
Wayne the confidence is exactly the point. Romney will instill the confidence
+Wayne Leng Which specific policy of Romney will drive  growth?  Could you please be specific?  All we are talking about is innuendos, nothing concrete.  I am tired of hearing opinions without any facts.  Can someone list me 3 things Romney has proposed, with specific examples from the past or from economist, that shows his policies will drive growth?  Please anybody enlighten me.
I lived in Boston when mitt was governor he cut education raised taxes on the middle class and left us with a big debt and no jobs,but he did pass Romneycare a.k.a obama care
Thanks, +Miguel Pimentel.  #1 - he cut education, #2 - he raised taxes on middle class, #3 - he left us with big debt, #4 - he created no jobs, and #5 - he passed Romneycare.

All Facts, No Opinions.  Unlike some others on this forum, who would like "All Opinions, No Facts".

Anybody else enlighten me...
+Arun Kumar From Fact check 
Obama Twists Romney’s Economic Record

Obama campaign ad takes aim at Romney's time as Massachusetts governor.

Posted on June 7, 2012
A new ad from the Obama campaign takes aim at Mitt Romney’s performance as governor of Massachusetts, claiming he had “one of the worst economic records in the country.” But the ad overreaches with several of its claims.

The ad states that job creation in Massachusetts “fell” to 47th under Romney. That’s a bit misleading. Massachusetts’ state ranking for job growth went from 50th the year before he took office, to 28th in his final year. It was 47th for the whole of his four-year tenure, but it was improving, not declining, when he left.
The ad’s claim that Romney “cut taxes for millionaires” isn’t as black-and-white as billed. Romney opposed a plan to impose a capital gains tax retroactively, insisting on delaying the hike eight months. That’s different than pushing for a tax cut.
The ad claims that Romney raised taxes on the middle class. It’s true that Romney imposed a number of fees, but none of them targeted middle-income persons. Also, Romney proposed cutting the state income tax three times — a measure that would have resulted in tax cuts for all taxpayers — but he was rebuffed every time by the state’s Democratic Legislature.
The ad claims Romney “left the state $2.6 billion deeper in debt.” It’s true that long-term bond debt — used for capital improvements — rose under Romney, as it had in the years before he took office. But Romney wasn’t piling up yearly deficits to support operating expenses the way the federal government is, because Massachusetts requires balanced budgets.
The ad claims that when Romney was governor, “Massachusetts lost 40,000 manufacturing jobs, a rate twice the national average.” That’s close to true, but the state lost a greater number of manufacturing jobs in the four years before Romney took office, and more in the four years after he left. In fact, the rate of job loss in manufacturing slowed during Romney’s time as governor.
The ad claims Romney “outsourced call center jobs to India.” Not exactly. What he did was veto a measure that would have prevented the state from doing business with a state contractor that was locating state customer-service calls in India. Democrats who controlled the Legislature could have overridden the veto, but didn’t. The veto was supported by leading newspapers as a savings to taxpayers.
The gift of +Bonnie Lu keeps giving.  All that you talk about in your long email, if I replace  "Obama" for "Romney", then it would precisely define Obama's term in office. 

Here's some rebuttal since you seem thoroughly confused.

"Job Creation" and "Job Growth" are two different things.  Romney was 47th in Job Creation (raw number of jobs created), but Job Growth (rate at which jobs grow) could have put Romney at 28th in the US.  Let me Illustrate:  I could create 1 job per month, which means during my term (4 years as Governor) I would have created 48 jobs.  Whereas, if I had created those same 48 jobs in 24 month (1/2 the time as Governor), then my Job Growth was twice as fast.  What you are talking about is the latter (Job Growth), but Romney must be defined by Job Creation (raw number of jobs created) and he has failed miserably.  In other words, if we double the US labor force and claim an unemployment number of 6%, no President can take credit of having reduced unemployment from 8 to 6% because the raw number of people unemployed is more than what it was before the labor force doubled.  In any case, in the last 20 months, Obama has created >3 million jobs?  All Facts, No Opinions.  

Rest later.
The gift of +Bonnie Lu . Romney when he was the governor never had a Great Recession, no collapse of financial institutions. Despite that he continues massive increase in debt...again there was no Great Recession. All economists agree that the Great Recession was next only to the Big Depression. So, the $780 billion stimulus spent by Obama for tax cuts and capital projects like Wormney should be perfectly acceptable to Bonnie Lu. also, do you know that the federal tax receipts to GDP since 2009 had been hovering in the 14 percent range. Do you know the long term historical average....18.5 percent.....4.5 percentage points lower because of the Great Recession. Wonder why we have huge deficits...because we don't collect enough.
The gift of +Bonnie Lu Can you show me how the fees imposed by Wormney did not affect the middle class? Are you just copy + pasting stuff from web. Because you are not processing it in the brain. Sorry.
The gift of +Bonnie Lu Tell me something. If you support and defend Wormney's Massachusetts record so much, why is the candidate Wormney not talking about his own record? You know he is running on his business credentials than his governor experience. But we won't let that go by....we will do all we can to defend Wormney's record.
OBs Great Recession, was created by your god! It is still being fed by your man. Can you not see this. We are going through his stated goal-----the great Transformation! FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, DID NOT COLLAPSE! TARP has been paid back, except for the auto part. Your government is not collecting enough? Because people are not making enough to feed their greedy pockets! We have huge deficits because they are spending too much! Deficits are created only when one spends, correct?
And as to his record in Mass. as governor I beleive he has a web site devoted to it!
The gift of +Bonnie Lu keeps giving.  What world are you living in?  Were you not alive in 2008?  Because, between 2008 and 2009, we lost 2.4 million the peak rate of 800,000 jobs per month.  Bush set up the bail out, TARP, and auto bail out.  All that Obama did was to continue the policies, which in some cases were the right one and in other cases not.

Regarding deficits, let me simplify it a bit so someone who's got no more than 3rd grade education can understand.

For example, say, a couple is making $150,000 (husband makes $90,000, wife makes $60,000) and they are spending $100,000 per year for mortgage, kids' education, cost of the couple's parents health care etc.  Suddenly, the wife loses her job so the total income is only $90,000.  Now, according to you, that family is run away spenders because they are spending $10,000 more than they make.  But, truly, year-over-year, the spending has not increased...stayed the same $100,000 per year.  So, isn't it because of "REVENUE DECREASE" that the deficit is $10,000 (vs. a surplus of $50,000) rather than the family overspending.  Does it make sense to you?  Do I need to simplify it further?

Here's a fact.  Budget spend to GDP during Bush's term was 22% and tax receipts to GDP was 19%.  Due to the Great Recession, the tax receipts from 2008 dropped to 14.5% of GDP, whereas budget spend increased to 24%.  In essence, a 2% increase in current spend vs. 4.5% decrease in federal receipt.  The reason federal receipts dropped is because of GDP contraction...unemployment (not due to greed shit you are talking about)...Bush's-No-Jobs-Growth-Tax-Cut-in-2001-2003.  Why don't you goto and read through some and educate yourself before you say nonsensical things.  

You are a complete drone or worse. You and your ilk...will be unable to convince those who are actually living this nightmare that all is well....and that Bush is the bad guy...2010 will continue despite your efforts to distort the reality that people are actually living and feeling and seeing!
+Bonnie Lu do you at least agree with the numbers and facts from CBO and Heritage Foundation? The numbers that I quoted above. You got to be extremely partisan to ignore.
Arun ---nice try---- of course they are better off then 1/09. That was the financial meltdown! The poll actually says---- only 28% say they are better off--- 66% say they are WORSE or the SAME!!!
+Bonnie Lu I really think you have a thinking problem. 45% people said that they were better off during Obama than under Bush. That indicates to me that people have found some economic respite since the meltdown of 2008. From an income point of view, 28% said better off, while 44% said they were me it means, although I have found a job, my income had not increased now than last 44% of the people feel the same as past year. Is that really hard to understand? It is precisely the partisanship that you refuse to acknowledge good news. Just like Wormney you want the County to fail. Had the poll suggested that more Americans are feeling depressed about the economic condition, you would have gladly highlighted it. You just want this country to fail and have your guy win this is not the American way +Bonnie Lu
+Bonnie Lu 'OBs great recession was created by your God. It is still being fed by your man.'....that was your earlier comment. In your recent comment about Americans feeling better off under Obama, here's what you said...'of course they are better off than1/09. That was the financial meltdown!'

do you have any credibility? In a span of 2 comments, you claim the meltdown was OBs myth, and in another you acknowledge the financial meltdown and hence people ought to feel better than in 1/09. You are hyper partisan. Ought to be ashamed.
If we cant create jobs the reality is that the illegals will be on the losing end of things - right or wrong. So really its something we need to prepare for and to think also about the idea that the real issue is a gross and widening disparity between rich and poor globally
Does anyone have a problem that what Obama did was completely illegal? He didn't go through Congress and the. Senate. He has done some things that. Should be impeached, and then be tried for treason!!

Well Reverand have you ever tried to see the other point of view on this? Or to consider even that another might see many other issues more significant than the one that seems to upset you so much. When we get angry and frustrated sometimes its good to look at the broader picture of things.
First thing dumb. Ass I'm a white man who is sick of all the lies that President Dumbass,is not helping this country, instead he has us at poverty level for the first time. Since. The20's.
I live in a very nice apartment, I'm a disabled veteran and I don't go to church, the other comment about what I do. To children. If you were. Standing in front. Of me and said what u said, I can promise YOU WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY IN ONE OF 2 vehicle. I'll let you. Pick which one.
Calling him brown isn't being a racist, any more then calling him black if he were darker.
Last thing u c__k_ucker I have never hurt a child in my life,you should. Know what you should know what and who you are talking to before running that big fat mouth of yours.
I would never hurt a child or a woman, I'm 56 and can say on my Honor as a United States Army SSG. The savere abuse that I, my mother, and brother.
I grew up protecting people like YOU!!!
You couldn't be more wrong!!!!
You Made A Huge MISTAKE ;
Reverand Eagle
life member of:
Handyman of America,
Disabled American Veteran,
Golden Eagle NRA

Im sorry I did not mean to offend you. I appreciate what you did for this country and I know it was tough probably in a way that I have no clue about. Really so much of what we say is about misunderstandings as when i spoke of Anger I was thinking of how hard I worked on a job to remodel a house but did not get compensated fairly - so I feel some anger about that. But to me for my sancity and peice of mind I just have to let go sometimes. I suggest maybe you to consider that and think about how you might also let go of some of those things - if it makes you so frustrated. To me if there is any value to what you did fighting for your country it is about giving assholes like me the right to speak my mind. And the same to you I may not like what you say but its your right to be able to express those views. And to me that is what is about this country that is worth fighting for. And thank you for doing your best to serve this country. We may have radically different views about things but thanks for sharing your perspective.
Add a comment...