Obama to announce immigration executive action in prime time address Thursday

[George II]

Source: CNN

By Jim Acosta, Athena Jones and Kevin Liptak, CNN

updated 1:00 PM EST, Wed November 19, 2014

Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama will unveil his long-awaited immigration plan Thursday evening, sources tell CNN, changing rules governing deportations that could affect millions of undocumented immigrants and setting off an explosive battle with Republicans.

Obama's prime-time address will be followed Friday by an event in Las Vegas, sources added. While exact details of his announcement haven't yet been made public, the basic outline of the plan, as relayed by people familiar with its planning, includes deferring deportation for the parents of U.S. citizens, a move that would affect up to 3.5 million people.

The President declared in June he wouldn't wait for Congress to pass a comprehensive overhaul of the immigration system, initially saying he would announce changes by the end the summer. The decision was delayed until after the midterm elections, when the White House believed it wouldn't be caught up in campaign politics.

But Republicans have expressed deep anger at the anticipated move, saying unilateral action on immigration would forestall any legislative action.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/19/politics/obama-immigration-announcement-thursday/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

---

Finally - he's DARING the republicans to do their job, basically "If you don't do your job, I'll have to do it for you!"

[DonCoquixote]

1. This should have been done

back in 2008. Sad that he is finally listening to his base, but then again, Hillary knows it is only two more years till she gets to roll the clock back again.

[yeoman6987]

4. Wouldn't that be incredible if the Grand Jury

Announcement is made right as the President begins to speak. It would not shock me.

[Kingofalldems]

22. What does a grand jury have to do with this?

[KingCharlemagne]

5. Um, small technical note (but Important): President Obama wasn't inaugurated

until 2009. Still, I take your larger point.

[George II]

7. HILLARY has nothing to do with this!

[Runningdawg]

2. Buy yourself a rain slicker and boots

heads are about to explode and the BS is going to get deep.

[yeoman6987]

3. Great! Best night of TV.

We already know he is going to do it so stop trying to talk Americans into and just do it.

[staggerleem]

9. Awwwww, ...

... is that nasty, bwack pwesident gonna wuin your TV pwans? Too bad. You know what he deserves?

Here ... have a pumpkin cookie , and go ni-nite.

[yeoman6987]

11. Really? You really think that I believe that?

(Especially your first sentence)?

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

6. OMG - this is the kicker!

"But Republicans have expressed deep anger at the anticipated move, saying unilateral action on immigration would forestall any legislative action."

Why have they been forestalling it up until now? Why did they reject the bill that passed the Senate, yet not comeback with anything? How many years have they wasted?

[Beartracks]

18. Haven't I read somewhere that Reagan did Exec Actions on immigration?

Or is that what Republicans reflexively call "leadership"... rather than "treason"?

#IOKIYAR

======================

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

20. Yes, that's absolutely true!

I read about it somewhere a day or two back.

[staggerleem]

8. "unilateral action ...

... on immigration would forestall any legislative action."

Now THERE's a crock of crap if I've ever heard one! If the House has objections to whatever action the President may take, then they can get their lazy butts to work on putting forth a bill that would, if passed, void the executive action. There's ALREADY a bill, passed by the Senate, gathering dust on Boehner's desk!

In truth, unilateral action on the part of POTUS is more likely to accelerate, rather than forestall, legislative action.

[nlkennedy]

10. The msm will prove it's conservative stance.

Watch the corporate media. Watch how angry and testy they'll become over this.

[Dawson Leery]

12. He should have done this a year ago.

[SunDrop23]

17. I'll have to show my uninformed stance...

I don't understand why this should have been done a year ago or at all.

You guys help me understand, because I admittedly have not been plugged in to this issue.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

21. Two word answer: Republican racists

[SunDrop23]

23. What?

You lost me.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

24. Republican teabaggers (racists) in the House would not take up the Senate bill

Nor offer anything themselves. This talk about going over the heads of congress is more lies by the Republican racists.

The house (BONER) stonewalled it from day one.

[SunDrop23]

25. So I am back to my original question

and maybe I did a poor job of asking it the first time...

Why the urgency?
I know the House has had it for a year or whatever but so what?
What if they kept the bill for another year and a half? So what?
What makes this one so special?

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

26. Yeah, why do anything worthwhile?

If it has to be on the black mans timetable.

On edit: I'm sorry I just posted that. I didn't mean to imply anything about your Democratic bonafides, I guess I'm just getting a little tired about debating this issue. President Obama did the right thing. That's about the totality of my opinion on the subject. Again, sorry I lashed out at you. It was misdirected. The RW freaks are the ones I'm really disgusted with.

[muntrv]

13. He should remind the audience that Raygun and Poppy Bush did the same things.

[George II]

14. True....and regarding Executive Orders in general....

...he's issued LESS than the following republican presidents:

Eisenhower - both terms
Nixon - both terms
Ford
Reagan - both terms
Bush I
bush II - both terms

and a slew of earlier republican presidents too!

[CullenBohannon]

16. 1986 amnesty

Wasn't it first passed by congress?

[hopemountain]

15. msm refusing to air the speech?

it is all over yahoo that cbs, nbc, abc, and fox are refusing to air the speech. this is the kind of propaganda shit yahoo likes to spread to the masses - so they will not tune in to hear the truth with their own ears of what will be said - so they can later make up more shit about what was really said by the president to feed the recall frenzy.

[George II]

19. I think they'll wind up airing the speech - it's big news whether they like it or not.