BLAST FROM THE PAST: PRESIDENT OBAMAS IMMIGRATION SPEECH- WHAT DOES HE ACTUALLY SAY? PT 1.

INTRODUCTION:  AS THE U.S. CONTINUES TO GRAPPLE WITH DONALD TRUMPS "POLICIES," I THOUGHT A TRIP DOWN MEMORY LANE WOULD SHOW US HOW THEN PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THE IMMIGRATION PROBLEM. 

(First Published on 11/25/2014.)

Let's try a Novel Approach. Ignoring what the Political Pundits on Television and the Radio Have to say, and actually READ THE TRANSCRIPT FROM PRESIDENT OBAMAS IMMIGRATION SPEECH.

It is available online.  So, if you are interested, why not Download it, before passing Judgment.

The following Posts on this Topic, are my Thoughts and Opinions taken directly from the Transcript.

Let's get started.

He opens by praising the Two- Hundred Year+ History of the U.S. welcoming Immigrants from around the World, and the Advantages it has given the Country over other Nations.

However, he goes on to say:

"...Today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it.  Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules.  Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them less."

From this passage we can take the following;

-  The President is acknowledging the State of the Immigration System, AND THE NEED FOR IT TO BE FIXED.

-  That the way the system is currently operated victimizes;  Legal Immigrants who follow the Law, and Honest Business Owners who offer good wages and benefits, who see competitors using undocumented workers to save money.

The President goes on to say;

"All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America."

-  In other words, the Advantages and Responsibilities go hand and hand.  With one comes the other.

LOOK FOR PART 2.

THE HATE CHRONICLES. THE KEYS TO UNDERSTANDING THE MINDSET, MOTIVATIONS, AND GOALS OF THE FAR RIGHT FANATIC. #1.

.

It is a mistake for Progressives to think that those who make up the Most Conservative Elements of the "NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY" ARE ALL CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH. WHILE THEY MAY VOTE AS A BLOC, THE PRIMARY MOTIVATION DIFFERS FROM GROUP TO GROUP.

While They are usually Packaged Together, ULTRA CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS HAVE REALIZED THAT FINDING THE ONE KEY ISSUE THAT DRIVES CERTAIN GROUPS OF VOTERS TO THE POLLS, OFTEN WILL TURN THEM INTO LOYAL ALLIES, who will support an agenda full of Issues They may care little about.

It could be GUN CONTROL, SAME- SEX MARRIAGE, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, IMMIGRATION LAWS, REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE etc. THE STRATEGY IS TO PUT FORTH AN UNCOMPROMISING, RIGID, AND VITRIOLIC POINT OF VIEW ON A PARTICULAR ISSUE, APPEALING TO THE BASER ELEMENTS OF HUMAN NATURE.

THE REASON: TO LEARN OF THE ONE ISSUE THAT EACH SECTION OF INDIVIDUAL VOTERS MOST IDENTIFIES WITH, AND MANIPULATE IT TO THEIR ADVANTAGE.

IT'S A TACTIC THAT REQUIRES NO INTELLECTUAL EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE LISTENER. THERE IS NO NEED TO UNDERSTAND, OR EVEN CARE ABOUT THE OPPOSITIONS POINT OF VIEW. IT PLAYS ON RAW EMOTION, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR CONTEMPLATION OR REFLECTION.

THE INDIVIDUAL IS ENCOURAGED NOT TO THINK ABOUT AN INTELLECTUAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE OPINION THEY ARE SUPPORTING, BUT TO REACT TO THE WORDS OF THE AUTHOR AND\OR SPEAKER, AND ACCEPTING THE MESSAGE AS TRUE, AND WORTHY OF SUPPORT.  THIS, IN TURN, ENCOURAGES AGREEMENT WITH OTHER OPINIONS THAT ARE EXPRESSED THE SAME WAY.

FEATURE ARTICLES. THE POLITICS OF PREJUDICE. PT 1.

If There is one thing we can Take from Recent National Political Campaigns, it is that PREJUDICE, IN ALL ITS FORMS, STILL SHOWS US WHY THE REAL STUMBLING BLOCK TO CAMPAIGN REFORM IS THE VOTER, NOT THE POLITICIAN.

It is still Amazing how Supporters of a Candidate, WILL STILL USE THE SAME TIRED EXCUSES TO JUSTIFY THEIR SUPPORT FOR A PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL OR PARTY, EVEN WHEN IGNORANT OR IRRATIONAL COMMENTS ARE MADE PUBLIC.

For Example:

 "(HE OR SHE) IS JUST SAYING WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK."

-  Really, and this ASSERTION IS ARRIVED AT BY....WHAT?

Maybe we should just take Their Word for it.

"(HE OR SHE) IS NOT SCARED TO TELL THE TRUTH.  OTHER

POLITICIANS ARE AFRAID TO."

-  So this Politician and Supporters are MIND READERS, and can

Ascribe MOTIVATIONS TO RIVALS who do not Voice Similar 

Opinions.

"THEY GIVE A VOICE TO THE DISENFRANCHISED VOTER, WHO

BELIEVE THEIR CONCERNS ARE BEING IGNORED."

Please Give me an Example of any Important and\or Divisive Issue

that does not have any Politicians or Pacs Championing One Side

or the Other, Deliberately Ignoring a Specific Segment of the Population.

END PT 1.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. PERSONAL ETHICS VS INSTITUTIONAL ETHICS, OR FINDING GOD VS FORCING GOD. PT 1.

Why is it that people with certain Moral Beliefs, automatically feel it is their mission to see that others also adopt this same ETHICAL SYSTEM?

What is even more Disturbing, is their desire to see it instituted into Law, either by Statute or Judicial Decree.  Unfortunately, the Lack of Freedom to Choose never seems to bother them, unless it inhibits their own ability to make Individual Decisions.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION, AS A RIGHT, INCLUDES THE ABILITY TO OBEY OR DISOBEY ANY FORM OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE.  IT IS NOT A MATTER OF SELECTING WHICH FORMS OF FAITH CAN BE LEGALIZED, AND ADJUSTING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TO CONFORM. NONE OF THEM ARE TO BE PART OF ANY CODE OF LAW, BECAUSE THE CONCEPT OF 'FREEDOM OF RELIGION' WOULD BE MEANINGLESS. 

A Response to this is could be something like: "The Word of God is Absolute, we must Convert or Convince others that their only hope for Salvation is accepting Scripture, and Submitting to Gods Will."

This type of Response makes the following Assumptions;

-  DEFINING "GOD" IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST BE ACCEPTED.

-  That Their DEFINITION OF GOD IS THE CORRECT ONE.

-  THAT FAITH ALONE IS REQUIRED AND NECESSARY.  NO LOGICAL PROOFS OR SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY IS NEEDED TO "KNOW THE TRUTH."

-  That GOD HAS REVEALED INSTRUCTIONS FOR A MORAL LIFE, THROUGH INTERPRETATIONS OF SPECIFIC TEXTS, WHICH MUST BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE AND INFALLIBLE.

-  "SALVATION" IS A DESIRABLE GOAL, THAT CAN ONLY BE ACHIEVED BY OBEYING THESE INSTRUCTIONS.

Now there is nothing UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ILLEGAL about believing any of the above.  A FREE SOCIETY allows each of us to find answers on our own and being able to share our BELIEFS OR FAITH with others. 

HOWEVER, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONVERTING OR CONVINCING SOMEONE TO ACT OR BELIEVE CERTAIN RELIGIOUS DEFINITIONS OR ABSOLUTES VOLUNTARILY, AND FORCING THEM TO THROUGH THREATS OF CRIMINAL OR CIVIL SANCTIONS INSTITUTED INTO LAW.

LOOK FOR PT 2 IN A FUTURE POST.