St. John's comments on Executive Order on Immigration

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

Quote from: Marco Baldi on January 31, 2017, 08:28:56 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 07:50:49 AM

Quote from: Marco Baldi on January 31, 2017, 07:30:10 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 12:22:38 AM

Quote from: Moon Mullin on January 31, 2017, 12:14:17 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 30, 2017, 11:51:22 PM

Quote from: Moon Mullin on January 30, 2017, 11:45:26 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 30, 2017, 11:36:03 PM

Quote from: Moon Mullin on January 30, 2017, 11:23:56 PM

So are you saying i

Quote from: Poison on January 30, 2017, 10:29:30 PM

Quote from: Moon Mullin on January 30, 2017, 09:18:00 PM

And as someone who lost family and over 25 others on 9/11 I say cram it Bobby.

The Saudis are still more than welcome here.

So explain the holes

So are you saying include them too or just allow everyone in?

I'm saying that if you think this is about our safety, your argument has some serious holes in it.

No, I'm not saying just allow everyone in. I'm saying that Trump is a bigot, and his decision is driven by bigotry. It has nothing to do with our safety. Don't you find it telling that Saudi Arabia isn't one of the counties that has been banned?

I'm  fine with including Saudi Arabia as well.  Trump being a bigot is your opinion on
on Trump.  If the ban saves one American life it's worth it.

How will this ban save lives? Trump has banned Muslim immigrants from countries who are not the country that is responsible for 9/11. Yet people from Saudi Arabia are welcome here. Instead of casually tossing them into the mix, shouldn't you question this choice?

The 7 countries are the top breeding areas for Isis at the moment. I don't see what the propblem is with more screening and vetting. As Mullin said, if it saves 1 American life it is a success.

Obama did a damn good job protecting our borders. He was dialed in. He wanted to actually do the job. This imbecile is only concerned with his ratings. He could give a shit about this country. There is nothing American about that pussy.

If you don't want to let someone in, don't. It's worked for the last 8 years, but somehow now it's a good idea to announce a ban? WTF for? Who do you think will really pay the price for this? How many on the fence, young, angry Muslims who are already living in this country just became radicalized with this "shrewd" move? Think this will save an American life? I think it's going to get thousands of innocent Americans killed. ISIS was never a problem on our soil. Kiss that shit goodbye.

Ask the Boston Marathon victims how well that worked

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

And that would be a factor because you like others don't give a hoot if those immigrants coming into our country bother to do it legally and become lawful citizens.

Get your shit straight. The two fckers in the Boston bombing came here legally. Why the F should we change our immigration policy in regards to keeping us safe if it's working? Now, innocent Americans are going to die JUST because of situations like Boston. Trump has just inspired a new generation of home grown terrorists.

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

gempeshaw could have done more to speak about the mission of the school and how current government policy makes it more difficult to fulfill that mission.  http://www.stjohns.edu/about/our-mission
" We are committed to a life of stewardship as a caretaker of God-given talents, resources and knowledge, and caregiver responding to the needs of others." 
"Awareness of and esteem for all individuals. A courteous regard for all people whose diversity is embraced and shared in learning, teaching and service to others within the University community and beyond." 
"Our community, which comprises members of many faiths, strives for an openness that is “wholly directed to all that is true, all that deserves respect, all that is honest, pure, admirable, decent, virtuous, or worthy of praise”"
"Wherever possible, we devote our intellectual and physical resources to search out the causes of poverty and social injustice and to encourage solutions that are adaptable, effective, and concrete. In the Vincentian tradition, we seek to foster a world view and to further efforts toward global harmony and development by creating an atmosphere in which all may imbibe and embody the spirit of compassionate concern for others so characteristic of Vincent."

I think the university mission is about rising above fear and hate and helping those in need, irrespective of faith, and training talented students to carry out that mission.  There may be some risk in doing that, but being catholic is about doing what is right even when it is the more difficult thing to do (remember that guy, jesus?).  that's not a political statement, whether dem, repub, or other, the university should stand for doing what is right  as a Catholic-Vincention University

We all know the mission of the University. This is a reason to be proud our new President. He did the right thing. Any donor who takes their money elsewhere because of this has lost sight of that mission.

It's amazing to me that half of country is perfectly fine with painting a billion Muslims with the same brush. That's what bigotry is. Out of a billion people, there are some very dangerous sub groups. That is clearly true. White Americans also have very dangerous sub groups. But this dispicable administration isn't about to rip the automatic weapons out of the hands of the Arian nation. Why do you suppose it is that when a white man goes into a black church and murders innocent people praying, that white man isn't a terrorist. He's mentally ill.

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

So we are supposed to tiptoe around on eggshells and hope they don't blowup the country that accepted them?

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 02:09:17 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Seems to be a bit of urgency in Syria. Wouldn't you want to be rescued if you lived there?

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 02:32:21 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 02:09:17 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Seems to be a bit of urgency in Syria. Wouldn't you want to be rescued if you lived there?

Plenty of $ in the surrounding Muslim nations to help their own out.  The USA has a lot of Its own problems that need to be taken care of. God forbid we help our own

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 02:32:21 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 02:09:17 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Seems to be a bit of urgency in Syria. Wouldn't you want to be rescued if you lived there?

You think people who live in Topeka need to be rescued.

Why does rescue comprise resettlement in the US, as opposed to say Saudi Arabia?

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 03:01:50 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 02:32:21 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 02:09:17 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Seems to be a bit of urgency in Syria. Wouldn't you want to be rescued if you lived there?

Plenty of $ in the surrounding Muslim nations to help their own out.  The USA has a lot of Its own problems that need to be taken care of. God forbid we help our own

So confident that Trump won't put us all in serious danger? After he won, and kept Tweeting insane nonsense weren't you concerned that he was mentally unstable?

So confident that Trump won't put us all in serious danger? After he won, and kept Tweeting insane nonsense weren't you concerned that he was mentally unstable?

Everyone on Twitter is mentally unstable.

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 04:15:35 PM

So confident that Trump won't put us all in serious danger? After he won, and kept Tweeting insane nonsense weren't you concerned that he was mentally unstable?

Everyone on Twitter is mentally unstable.

He's the President.

Has a hmm, you know, maybe this wasn't such a good idea crossed your mind yet?

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 03:01:50 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 02:32:21 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 02:09:17 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 01:40:47 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 01:37:51 PM

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 09:08:59 AM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 08:46:36 AM

You're looking at the alternative facts. The two brothers in Boston were American citizens.

No. Both came to the US under a grant of political asylum. One was naturalized, the other wasn't.

They came here legally.

I didn't say they didn't. But if you're going to call people liars and bigots you should have your facts straight. Which is why I helpfully provided the correct information.

Fair enough.

So Trump will ban Muslims from 7 countries to provide the safety that we desperately need despite the fact that Obama has clearly already provided that very safety. Do you really think that this will make us safer than we are now? There are over a million Muslims in our country now. How many of them because of this will turn a lifetime of frustration into blowing up a building or opening fire in a shopping mall?

I don't know enough about national security to say. I do know that terrorists were purposefully resettled in Europe as purported refugees and would not be surprised if the same thing happened in the US. Oh wait it already has:

"Several dozen suspected terrorist bombmakers, including some believed to have targeted American troops, may have mistakenly been allowed to move to the United States as war refugees, according to FBI agents investigating the remnants of roadside bombs recovered from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discovery in 2009 of two al Qaeda-Iraq terrorists living as refugees in Bowling Green, Kentucky -- who later admitted in court that they'd attacked U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- prompted the bureau to assign hundreds of specialists to an around-the-clock effort aimed at checking its archive of 100,000 improvised explosive devices collected in the war zones, known as IEDs, for other suspected terrorists' fingerprints."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Anyway I don't see what the big deal is about a three month ban on immigration from seven countries. Obama banned immigration from Iraq in 2011. Jimmy Carter banned immigration from Iran in 1979. I don't recall Chuck Schumer bursting into tears then. 

Seems to be a bit of urgency in Syria. Wouldn't you want to be rescued if you lived there?

You think people who live in Topeka need to be rescued.

Why does rescue comprise resettlement in the US, as opposed to say Saudi Arabia?

Resettlement is what this country is. No one came up out of the soil even though some might believe that they did.

And in regards to Topeka, I haven't given much thought to the people in Topeka, but not to worry, those are the people who Trump is going to save. Screw automation. Let's get the lever pullers back out there anyway. He's going to bring manufacturing back or he's not and instead he's going to F around on Twitter.

This is our President. Not Ann Coulter, but is there even a subtle difference?

Whether or not this policy makes us safer is debatable. The way the EO was implemented was symptomatic of an autocratic-leaning administration.  The normal protocol for an EO calls for collaboration with other agencies to ensure legality under the constitution and to ensure that execution of the order is understood by the government officials who have to enforce it.  At a minimum, this was very poorly handled and makes the WH look inept, malevolent, or both.

My view is that this EO oversteps the boundaries of executive powers and is discriminatory (on the basis of religion).  Moreover, the intelligence community views this as a strategic misstep in foreign policy.  It seemingly is a solution to a problem that does not exist.  Fear mongering, playing to the base...

If Bannon wasn't running the WH, benefit of the doubt might be in order.

Also, I think it's important that a community like JJ discuss this stuff. We are more alike than we are different and hearing a diversity of opinion is helpful for everybody.  Hopefully we keep it civil.

Quote from: Foad on January 31, 2017, 05:44:09 PM

Quote from: Poison on January 31, 2017, 04:15:35 PM

So confident that Trump won't put us all in serious danger? After he won, and kept Tweeting insane nonsense weren't you concerned that he was mentally unstable?

Everyone on Twitter is mentally unstable.

He's the President.

Has a hmm, you know, maybe this wasn't such a good idea crossed your mind yet?

I didn't vote for Trump. So no.

Resettlement is what this country is. No one came up out of the soil even though some might believe that they did.

Everywhere was once empty. Nowhere in the world is that justification for an unfettered immigration policy, except maybe Germany, and look how that turned out. In two generations there isn't going to be a Germany. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but only because of Germans. As the Russian proverb says: the German may be a good fellow but it’s better to hang him.

In any event the fact that immigration once occurred doesn't mean that immigration should continue. Bring me your tired and your hungry isn't policy, it's bad poetry.  Odd how fond alleged progressives are of the 19th century when it suits them. 

 

Whether or not this policy makes us safer is debatable. The way the EO was implemented was symptomatic of an autocratic-leaning administration.  The normal protocol for an EO calls for collaboration with other agencies to ensure legality under the constitution and to ensure that execution of the order is understood by the government officials who have to enforce it.  At a minimum, this was very poorly handled and makes the WH look inept, malevolent, or both.

"I've got a pen, and I've got a phone, and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive action.Where I can act on my own without Congress, I'm going to do so. I've got a pen to take executive actions where Congress won't, and I've got a telephone to rally folks around the country on this mission."

Donald Trump  Barack Obama

Quote from: Gray Chudney on January 31, 2017, 07:07:31 PM

Whether or not this policy makes us safer is debatable. The way the EO was implemented was symptomatic of an autocratic-leaning administration.  The normal protocol for an EO calls for collaboration with other agencies to ensure legality under the constitution and to ensure that execution of the order is understood by the government officials who have to enforce it.  At a minimum, this was very poorly handled and makes the WH look inept, malevolent, or both.

"I've got a pen, and I've got a phone, and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive action.Where I can act on my own without Congress, I'm going to do so. I've got a pen to take executive actions where Congress won't, and I've got a telephone to rally folks around the country on this mission."

Donald Trump  Barack Obama

Interesting that Constitutionalists who beat this drum for years under Obama are silent on a pen stroke more extreme than any executive action since Nixon.