Showing posts with label Immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Immigration. Show all posts

Friday, October 01, 2010

Meg Whitman Is a Symbol of Republican Hypocrisy on Immigration

Meg Whitman has been working overtime to explain away her maid problem.

But the story is larger than Whitman. It is a symbol of the Republican hypocrisy that is at the heart of the entire immigration debate. The irony is always in the background.

Migrants would not be pouring into the U.S. if there were no employers hiring them. Most of those who take advantage of undocumented workers are business owners - construction contractors, rural farmers, manufacturers, restaurant owners, etc. And the vast majority of them are Republican/Conservative.

They use undocumented immigrants as a way to maximize profits. It is part of the business model for some of these people. For them, it is a way to take advantage of defacto slave labor, with little risk of facing any consequences. Having undocumented workers allows these employers to avoid paying minimum wage, avoid dealing with the IRS (can pay workers under the table in cash), can avoid paying workers the exact amount they are owed for their work, can avoid paying workers compensation expenses, can avoid OSHA regulations, can avoid State and Federal labor regulations, etc. The result is that many of these migrants are in work environments where they are subject to all sorts of abuse.

When will the media start using the term "illegal employers"? When will the focus shift towards those who hire undocumented workers, despite available E-verify technology that can prevent the vast majority of the problem? One main reason is because Republicans in Congress, and their rich Conservative supporters in the business community, really don't want to see any kind of enforcement that targets employers. It is no coincidence that the Chamber of Commerce- basically a Republican group - supports the GOP. The business community wants to maintain the status-quo. I am amazed by the fact that this always seems to be left out of the discussion.

It is interesting to see Republicans on one hand using immigration to rally their base by stirring up xenophobia & racism against Latinos, but on the other hand not really tackling the problem in any meaningful way through immigration reform (obstructing anything Obama proposes on the issue) because what they really want to do is maintain the status quo. Republicans in Congress want to make sure that their benefactors in the business community can continue to reap the benefits from the defacto slavery that currently exists for migrants... because the savings (profits) are just too enticing for them.

This is the elephant in the room that the media never seems to focus on when it comes to immigration. The Republicans are playing the hell out of both sides, and they have been doing a pretty good job fooling the public on this for a long time.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Why blacks must reject "anchor baby" fever: African-Americans and Latinos should be brothers-in-arms in fighting Republican extremism

A young mother has a baby in San Antonio, TX. Minutes later, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents swoop in and place the mother and baby under arrest. The mom goes to jail for “harboring an illegal” while the baby goes to jail for being in the country illegally. Later that day federal agents take them to the border and tell them not to come back.

Read the rest at The Loop.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

More Undocumented Sent Home Under Obama

This runs contrary to the Conservative argument that Obama has been doing nothing and wants to open the borders.

Friday, July 02, 2010

Did Congressman Gutierrez Fail Government 101?


Disclaimer: I fully support immigration reform...and have supported it since this latest debate started (under George W. Bush).

However, I have been extremely annoyed recently by Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) and his verbal attacks aimed at President Obama. Gutierrez and his supporters have been lobbying the President hard to magically make comprehensive immigration reform a reality. But really....what exactly do they want Obama to do? Am I missing something here?

The President can't create and pass legislation. That's the job of the Congress. Obama can't sign into law what doesn't exist. And even if Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Harry Reid & others were to craft some sort of legislation...it would barely get through the House, and would be dead on arrival in the Senate. The math simply doesn't work and everyone knows it (at least everyone except for Gutierrez). I wrote several months ago that the part of Obama's agenda that dealt with immigration reform was probably unachievable and would likely have to be dropped from his list of goals. It's a lost cause. I never believed it should have been something that President Obama should even try...especially after seeing what happened to George W. Bush (by his own Party). It would be a huge waste of political capital, after he already wasted vast amounts of political capital in his first year, fighting for what ended up being a bad health care reform bill in my view. Obama could waste another year on immigration reform and be left with nothing to show for it in the end. Meanwhile, he would be so weakened by it that he wouldn't be able to get anything else accomplished. If that's not bad enough, his efforts would simply be used as a basis for Republicans to energize their supporters going into the midterm elections... creating even bigger losses for Democrats than would have been the case otherwise.

A Republican President wasn't able to do it with a Republican Congress... Republicans blocked the effort. They are going to be even more aggressive in blocking Obama. Obviously nothing can be done before the mid-terms, and Gutierrez has to know this. Most members of Congress are worried about re-election and aren't going to touch the taboo subject (made taboo by Republicans/Tea Partiers). It's radioactive. There are just certain political and mathematical realities that cannot be ignored.

On the other side of the midterms, Republicans are expected to win back one, if not both Houses of Congress...making the passage of any legislation on comprehensive immigration reform impossible. Even under assessments friendly to the Democrats, Republicans are expected to gain so many seats...that even if they come up short on regaining the majority in the House or Senate, they will still be able to block legislation. So I just don't understand what Gutierrez, and his supporters, are so upset about. Why are they upset with Obama? Do they really believe he is Superman or some sort of political MacGyver? President Obama cannot make a proclamation and declare something to be law. Congressman Gutierrez and his supporters should be lobbying the other members of Congress.... not just the President (and perhaps they shouldn't be focused on the President at all in this case). Gutierrez should target Congressional Republicans in particular. That's where he should focus his anger. Not at the President.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Arizona Threatens To Cut Off L.A.'s Electricity

This would be in retaliation to the L.A. boycott of Arizona's racist immigration law.

What The ***k?!!!!

See for yourself.

I say let em secede. Cut off Federal funding to these jackasses. As a matter of fact. They can have the South if they want it. Can't stand the South. Never liked it. (although I am not ready to give up Florida or Texas.... two of my adoptive home States). I would be ready to fight for Texas or Florida. But the rest, they can have. lol

Monday, May 17, 2010

Both Sides of The Loop Podcast

On this week's episode, Marvin King and Lenny McAllister cover minorities getting the frisk from NYC cops, Arizona's immigration law and civil rights, the anti-incumbent mood in American politics and Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Arizona Quickly Modifies Immigration Law To Get Around Legal Challenges

The Arizona legislature modified their racist and unconstitutional immigration law earlier this month because they knew that the original law wouldn't hold up in Federal court. The move was made in anticipation of a mountain of lawsuits that would have likely made the legislation null and void in the Federal appeals courts.

The original law would have allowed (and in many cases required) police in Arizona to use an immigration check as the reason to make initial contact with an individual. Now the law states that officers can check immigration status as a consequence of some other violation of the law or some other contact, which could be just about anything. The provisions in the modification, for the most part, always existed. This is currently part of normal police practice across the country. Police officers already contact immigration authorities to report suspects who may be undocumented, when the issue comes up as a consequence of other violations of the law. So if that's the case, why have a law that codifies what is already the normal practice? Because that was not the original intent of the law. Arizona is trying to be slick with this move.

The changes will help the State defend against legal challenges, and will make the law tougher to kill in the courts. However, the law is still racist and unconstitutional. The law will still require some level of racial profiling. It still violates equal protection rights. It would still require a certain segment of the population to show proof of citizenship, while not requiring the same from others. The only way that this law could be constitutional, would be if everyone in Arizona were required to carry proof of citizenship and all were scrutinized equally. Gov. Brewer herself tried to claim that she didn't know what an immigrant looked like (in an attempt to blunt criticism.... and to try to show that the law would be applied to everyone....of course that's a lie. Of course this whole issue is about Mexicans). It is inherently racist...even with the changes....the changes only lessen the degree of the racism. The law also tries to trump Federal laws and Federal jurisdiction, another problem for Arizona as it tries to come up with a defense. Unfortunately those who want to challenge the law will have a steeper hill to climb.

The modifications were aimed at fixing some of the 4th amendment problems. But the problems with the 14th amendment are still there. Fortunately, this law was so horribly bad to begin with, that there are a number of routes to kill it. The modifications only plug one hole in the dam. This is why I believe the law was never really meant to be practical. I think it had more to do with Arizona wanting to send a message to Washington.

Read the Text of the Actual Law with the Modifications

Friday, May 07, 2010

Sometimes, you read things and go 'WOW'. Marco Rubio has made me do that.

hat tip-djchefron

I have to admit, I didn't believe it could be true.

But, the headline confirmed it:

Marco Rubio says deport all the immigrants

Yes, you read right.

Marco Rubio says deport all the immigrants

Are there words?

Here is a quote from Rubio:

Then Rubio explained that he is against letting illegals become legal:


Rubio also rejected the notion of a "path to citizenship" or "amnesty," despite "the human stories."

"There are going to be stories of very young kids that were brought to this country at a very young age who don't even speak Spanish that are going to be sent back to Nicaragua or some other place. And it's gonna feel weird and I understand that," he said, suggesting that those hardships would be a price worth paying.



Hah! That's a quote from Marco Rubio, son of Cuban refugees. Cubans were, for decades, welcome to settle in America without visas or papers or anything, and they are still allowed to enter the the U.S. via Mexico without fear of being deported.

But Nicaraguans? Ugh, no. Marco Rubio says GO HOME.


Ain't that a bitch?

IFFFFF they were from any other country (cough, Haiti, double cough), Cubans would be considered ILLEGAL and SHIPPED BACK.

They aren't here through legal channels.

But, HE and HIS have made it, and the rest of you can go f-yourselves.

All the Latinos in Florida who are thinking of giving Rubio a chance in part because of ' Latino Pride'...

well......

when the chips are down, and he needed to take a stand...

look what stand he took.

Look who he sucked up to.

Look whose ass he kissed...

He's showing you who he is....

we have a term for folks like Rubio in the Black community....one of my current favorite terms is Slave Catcher.

may your vision be clear as you look at Rubio.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Rachel Maddow takes on the architect of the' If you ain't White, you better have papers' Law

hat tip-SouthernGirl2

Rachel Maddow interviews the president of the Federation of American Immigration Reform

Rachel ripped Dan Stein to shreds


from Political Carnival

The president of FAIR (Federation of American Immigration Reform), Dan Stein, was on the Rachel Maddow Show. It was brutal.

Because of this interview (read: tussle; read: battle; read: slaughter), we have a new word: "Steined"... as in, "You've been Steined by Rachel Maddow".

Witness the peerless Rachel "Stein" Stein:


Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Did Another Terrorist Attack Go Under the Radar?

Did we have another terrorist attack by Republican Right Wing extremists?

Apparently illegal immigration activist leader Shawna Forde has been charged in connection with a double murder in Arizona (including the Cold blooded killing of a child). Was this a terrorist attack made to look like a home invasion robbery? Or was the crime intended to fuel more extremist activity? Either way... this was a deplorable act. I'm sure her feelings towards Hispanics (the dehumanization of them) probably made it easier for her to be involved in this crime (if she's in fact guilty).

Why hasn't Faux News been reporting this story day and night? The same goes for the other big networks. This didn't get nearly as much airtime as the story about Obama taking his wife to dinner....or the latest antics from someone in Hollywood.

See related story w/ video from Crooks and Liars

Thursday, February 21, 2008

The Texas Democratic Debate - The Verdict


Update: So, Who Won The Debate? Check The Results of the Daily Kos Poll.

*******************************************

My original Post-debate comments

As expected... the corporate media did its best to help Hillary Clinton tonight, but there was no doubt who came away looking better after this debate.

The bottom line is, Clinton needed a knockout victory in this debate to help halt Obama's momentum going into March 4th. But she came up short. In fact, she didn't even score a knockdown, let alone the knockout blow that she needed.

Obama, on the other hand, was polished tonight. He gave one of the best debate performances to date, and it came at a time when he really needed to look good, particularly for voters in Texas and Ohio. Going into the debate, Obama needed to hold his own. But he went above and beyond that tonight. Not only did he hold his ground, but he out maneuvered Clinton, and looked very Presidential in the process.
If by some miracle he wins Texas, his campaign staff will have to look back at this debate as a crucial moment.

Obama had a response for every attack and cheap shot that Clinton threw his way. She continued with the same tired "experience" argument... the same "day one" nonsense that has not worked for weeks. You would think her campaign handlers would have revamped her message by now. Obama was ready for everything she had...which, as it turns out, was nothing new.

Also, when asked about the delegate debacle, Hillary lied and claimed that she was "not worried about that"... that it was no big deal to her. Yet, at this very moment, her operatives are scheming, hoping to take the nomination by underhanded means (if they can). So it's obviously a big issue for her.

The best part?

When the crowd responded with Booos to Hillary Clinton's arrogant attack in which she claimed that Obama's theme of "Change You Can Believe In" really stood for "Change That You Can Xerox". That attack pertained to Obama's use of words that were previously used by Deval Patrick, the Governor of Massachusetts and a friend of Obama's....as well as being the Co-Chair of Obama's National Campaign. It was Patrick who suggested that Obama use the line.

The media attempted to help Clinton by grossly overplaying what was probably her only strong moment in the debate - when she offered conciliatory comments in the last 20 seconds of the program. Sheila Jackson Lee (yet another CBC Clinton supporter) and the boneheaded pundits from MSNBC and CNN claimed that this was a "glorious moment" for Clinton and suggested that this was where she won the debate. They claimed that the comments drew a standing ovation. WRONG! The standing ovation came because it was the end of the debate. STOP THE LYING AND HYPERBOLE! This is not journalism or first rate reporting. It's infotainment run amuck. All of the spin is enough to give you motion sickness.

Below is a live blog roundup of the debate, taken from the BaltimoreSun.com (Read from the bottom up)

LIVE BLOG: THE DEMOCRATIC DEBATE IN AUSTIN

By Lisa Anderson

GOOD EVENING!

The stakes couldn't be higher in Austin, Texas tonight as Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama go one-on-one in a Democratic presidential debate sponsored by CNN and airing at 7 PM (CST).

I am blogging for you from my post in New York City, while my colleagues in Austin cover the action on the ground in the Longhorn State.

The crucial, delegate-rich Texas and Ohio primaries are coming up on March 4 and new Washington Post-ABC News polls show the two candidates locked in a Texas tie, while Clinton of New York shows a narrow lead in Ohio over her Senate colleague from Illinois.

Tonight's debate represents their first face-off since their meeting in Hollywood on Jan. 31. They will have only one more planned televised debate--February 26 on MSNBC--before what are shaping up as very close contests in Texas and Ohio.

Clinton, who has lost the last 10 state primaries and caucuses to Obama, desperately needs to win, and win big. To do that, she must use this debate to convince voters that she truly is not only tough enough and experienced enough for the nation's top job, but diplomatic enough to overcome the polarizing image that dogs her.

Obama, who has been on an impressive roll, wants to keep that roll going through the next big contests and beyond. To do that, he must effectively counter Clinton's charges that "the best words in the world aren't enough unless you match them with action." Or, in Texas parlance, that he's all hat and no cattle. And, he must avoid getting lost in the verbal weeds when talking about policy.

Given what has transpired in the last three weeks, it will be interesting to see if the sarsaparilla sweetness that drenched the last encounter between these two will continue or if they are now locked and loaded for a showdown tonight.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

9:55 pm--LET'S AGREE THAT WE REALLY DO AGREE

While they may have been trying to draw more sharply the differences between them, Clinton and Obama Thursday night succeeded more in showcasing the similarities in their positions.

As hard as they tried to elbow each other, more often than not they ended up saying that they "agreed" with each other.

Given the fact that polls show them deadlocked in Texas and extremely close in Ohio--the next two big primaries on March 4--there seemed to be little in this debate that promised to significantly shift those numbers.

Neither candidate stumbled and both got off some good lines. Some of Clinton's best lines, in fact, were her last and, indeed, she got the very last word in the debate.

Before Texans and Ohioans vote, Obama and Clinton will have one more televised go at each other during the MSNBC debate next Tuesday.

Thank you for joining me tonight.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

9:45pm--ONE MORE QUESTION.......

What was the moment that tested you the most, the candidates are asked.

Obama notes he was raised by a single mom, made mistakes in his youth but learned to "take responsibility" not only for his own actions but how to help others. His cumulative experience as a community organizer and attorney,he said, is what helps him to lead and bring people togetrher.

Said Clinton, wryly, "Well I think everybody here knows" I've had some challenges in my life." The audience laughs. But, she said, nothing she has been through is as tough as some of the things she's seen, including badly wounded soldiers coming home from Iraq.."The hits I've taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on everyday" in the lives of people around the country.

No matter what happens, she said of herself and Obama, "We're going to be fine. We have strong support from our families and firends. I just hope we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people and that's what this election should be about."

Obama appeared to open his mouth to add something, but Campbell Brown abruptly ended the debate .

To his credit, Obama nonethless, graciously held Clinton's chair as she rose to leave. She smiled. After all, she had the last word.

And that was that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

9: 36pm--MUM'S THE WORD

The subject is secrecy. Obama is asked by CNN's John King why he has not disclosed what earmarks he has proposed in the budget. Not true, Obama said. He brushed the question away with a promise that he'd get the info for King asap. "I've been consistently in favor of more disclosure about earmarks," he said, making sure they are "not done in the dark of night" and will push for that when he's president.

Clinton says she's going to get us back to "fiscal responsibility," and did we mention middle-class tax cuts, college affordability and universal healthcare? On those counts, she said, she's more than a match for anything McCain can throw at her.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

9:30pm--IS THE SURGE WORKING?

Surge or no surge, Clinton will begin withdrawing troops within 60 days of her inauguration and make the Iraqis get serious about carrying their own water.

Obama admits that violence has been reduced in Iraq since the surge began surging. "But, this is a tactical victory imposed upon a huge strategic blunder," he said. Moreover, he said, it will be easier for the candidate opposed to Iraq from the beginning to debate and draw a contrast with John McCain. The Arizona senator and presumptive GOP presidential nominee, Obama said, has indicated the U.S. may have troops in Iraq for 100 years.

Time for another commercial break.....

-------------------------------------------------------------------

9:22 pm--WHO'S MORE READY TO LEAD?

Clinton quickly assures the questioner that she's the one who's ready on Day One-- then insists on getting back to her healthcare answer which was so rudely interrupted.

Obama points out that Massachusetts, which has a universal healthcare plan, has had to exempt 20 percent of the uninsured in the state because they simply could not pay for insurance, despite the threat of fines.

Clinton says programs like Social Security and Medicaid would never have worked had everyone not been obliged to contribute. The same thing for universal healthcare, she said. "I want universal healthcare," she added, verbally stamping her feet.

Campbell Brown struggles to get them back to the leadership question.

Clinton launches into another litany of her accomplishments, including serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "Just this week," she pointed out, we had elections in Pakistan..change of government in Cuba, independence in Kosovo and our embassy in Serbia set on fire. "When you think about everything that is going to happen...I believe I am prepared and ready on Day One to be the commander in chief, to be the president...And that is what I'm putting forth to the voters."

'I wouldn't be running if I didn't think I was prepared to be commander in chief," Obama countered. He stresses that he will use the military wisely and harks back to Clinton's vote to authorize the war in Iraq.

By opposing the war, he said, "I believe I showed the judgment to be commander in chief and Sen. Clinton was wrong in her judgment." In fact, he basically said, he has shown the best judgment in almost everything. So there--again.

-------------------------------------------------------------

9:09 pm--HEALTHCARE REDUX

Obama stresses that he and Clinton agree that everybody needs healthcare, they just want to get there in different ways. He says he knows that everyone wants healthcare, but not everyone can afford it and that's why he thinks mandatory insurance is not the way to go.

Clinton opens her mouth, raises her hand and clearly is dying to respond--but Campbell Brown cuts her off to go to commericial....If Clinton's smile gets any tighter she'll need the Jaws of Life.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

9:01 pm--"COPYCAT?"

Asked about the charge that he plagarized a speech from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, Obama scoffed. "The notion that I stole the line from someone who is my national co-chair, who gave me the line, is silly," he said, saying the "silly season" has set in.

Clinton swooped in like a raptor . "If your candidacy is going to be about words, they should be your own words," she snapped Then, she came in for the kill, "Lifting passages from someone else's speeches isn't change you can believe in, it's Xeroxing," she said, to a chorus of boos.

------------------------------------------------------

8:50 --THEY'RE BAAAACK...

John King asks them about the difference between their jabs at each other on the stump and c the cordiality on display so far tonight,
He asks Clinton if she things Obama is all hat and no cattle. She says she thinks the next president will have to be less hat and more cattle, without commenting directly on Obama's haberdashery or livestock.
However, she stresses "there are differences between our records and our experiences." She notes nastily that one of Obama's surrogates was tongue-tied recently when asked to name one of his accomplishments.

"I think actions do speak louder than words," Obama shot back and began listing all the great things he accomplished in his political career so far, both in the Illinois legislature and in the U.S. Senate.

"I do think there is a fundamental difference between us in how change comes about," he said, noting he's been endorsed by every major newspaper in the state of Texas. He said his rival has implied that "somehow they've been duped" and have yet to see the reality of things.

You need more than policy positions to govern, he said pointedly You also need to inspire.

------------------------------------------------------------

8:48--ENGLISH FOR ALL?

Both Obama and Clinton agree--yes again--that everyone should learn to speak English in America, although bilingual education is an important aid in that effort.
Obama also wants English speaking children to learn other languages.

So far, a bit sharp elbowing at the top, but mostly they seem to agree on just about everything--except who should be president....

Commercial Break...

-----------------------------------------------------------

8:43 pm--ON THE (BORDER) FENCE

Clinton said the U. of Texas at Brownsville would wind up with part of its campus cut off by the proposed border fence with Texas, calling some of these plans absurd. "There may be some places where a physical barrier is appropriate" but as with so much the "Bush administration has gone off the deep end," she said.
"There is technology than can be used instead of a physical barrier," Clinton said, noting that the views of the people who live along the border should be heard.

Obama said, "Well, this is an area where Sen. Clinton and I almost totally agree." Clinton nodded her head and smiled slightly.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

8:35 pm--IMMIGRATION

Asked if the canadidates would stop raids on illegal immigrants--a huge issue in Texas--Clinton emphasized a more humane approach that keeps parents from being ripped suddenly from their children and that would establish a path to citizenship.
Obama agreed and added that it is "absolutely critical" that we tone down the rhetoric in the immigration debate that leads to discrimination. He also wants to institute comprehensive reform that cracks down on employers who hire undocumented workers but doesn't make the path to legal citizenship so expensive and difficult that people are discouraged from trying.

----------------------------------------------------------------

8:25 pm--ECONOMICS 101--AGAIN

Obama said he and Clinton agree on many economic issues, the question is "how to get it done?"

A priority must be to overcome the influence of special interests, he said, noting that's an area where he thought he and Clinton slightly diverge.
Clinton also agreed that they agree on a number of things, including adjusting the tax code to help the middle class. Clinton launched into a litany of all the other things she would do, such as creating new "green jobs," put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure and "end George Bush's war on science."
--------------------------------------------------------------------

8:15 pm--LIFE POST-FIDEL

Clinton says she's ready to work with a new Cuban government and "make it very clear if Cuba moves toward democracy and freedom for its people" the U.S. will work with them.

Obama said he's ready to meet with the next leader of Cuba--with preparation and an agenda--saying the US should talk not just with its friends. This is where he got into trouble on another occasion, when Hillary jumped him, insinuating he was naive for saying he would talk to any leader without condition.
This time he seemed to side-step that, but Clinton wouldn't let him off the hook that easily. "There has been this difference between us about when the president should offer a meeting, without conditions....," she said, stressing that while the unilateral arrogance of the Bush administration is over, prudence is also in order.
Obama reiterated that "preparation is important," but said the president must take a more active role in diplomacy than in the past.
So there.

-------------------------------------------------------------

8:03 pm--AND THEY'RE OFF

Obama won the coin toss and opted to go second with his opening statement, so Clinton has begun with a chat about her happy memories of the Longhorn State, about how Rep. Barbara Jordan and Gov. Ann Richards were such inspirations to her. Then she launched into how she has pioneered health care for children and families and will continue to do that in the White House. She heartily invited the people of Texas and Ohio to help her "continue to make a difference" for Americans.

Obama, in his turn, assured the audience that he and Clinton were friends before this campaign and will be friends when it's over. Then he talked about how he has encountered families whose mortgages have doubled, people who work two jobs and can't afford health care, communities devastated by jobs shipped overseas. And families whose loved ones have been lost in "a war I believe never should have been authorized." Zing into Clinton, who smiled tightly but looked taken aback.
"Washington is a place where good ideas go to die," Obama said, because "too many politicians are interested in scoring political points rather than" resolving differences to get things done.

So, the gloves are off from the get-go tonight.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

FEMA's Michael Brown Promoted To Chief of Immigration & Customs Enforcement

I'm sorry... did I write "Michael Brown"? I meant Julie Myers. Julie Myers was recently promoted to head ICE, despite being woefully unqualified. She has no law enforcement background, or immigration experience. The 38 year old Myers is yet another crony appointment by Bush & Co. Apparently they didn't learn from the political appointment of Horse industry professional Michael Brown to head one of the most important agencies in the Federal government- FEMA.

And her promotion went through despite the racist Halloween incident where she awarded a White Homeland Security employee for "most original costume" when he showed up at a Halloween Party dressed as a Black prison inmate. So instead of being reprimanded for her actions she was awarded with a promotion to a position that she is not even qualified for. Yet the Homeland Security employee was put on leave.

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

9500 Liberty on YouTube

This channel is an Interactive Documentary about the politicization of the immigration issue, currently being shot in Northern Virginia. The filmmakers, Eric Byler, Annabel Park, Jeff Man, Zhibo Lai will respond to viewer feedback, including requests for more coverage on certain storylines, contextual clarifications, and even perhaps on-site production. The aim of the documentary is to inform the public, and investigate alternatives to the intense polarization that is hindering progress on the immigration issue.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

The U.S. Is Still Wide Open To Another Al Qaeda Attack

U.S. Visa System Gives Al Qaeda An Open Door Invitation To Attack Us Again

Six years after 9/11, the U.S. remains unprepared either to prevent an Al Qaeda attack or to deal with the aftermath of such an attack. The Bush Administration and the Congress have been slow to respond to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, which called for tighter immigration policies, and interoperable communications for first responders, among other recommendations. Some recommendations have been completely ignored by Bush & Co. In addition, the U.S. health system is incapable of handling a mass casualty event, especially with the shortage of nurses, hospital beds, trauma centers, and first responders, and poorly prepared emergency rooms.

Now a new intelligence assessment is warning that Al Qaeda has regrouped and is intent on launching more attacks on U.S. soil. Listen Here. Meanwhile, the incompetent U.S. government is asleep at the wheel once again. The Bush & Co. policy of pushing for military action while ignoring domestic security has proven to be a disaster....and has left the country wide open to further attacks. The biggest hole in domestic security that the neocons have ignored is the U.S. Visa System. I have been screaming for years that this hole had to be plugged, and that the U.S. was leaving itself wide open for more attacks. The same vulnerability that the 9/11 hijackers exploited was never fixed. In fact, Bush & Co. relaxed some Visa restrictions, making it easier to enter the country. For example, travellers from Europe are not required to even apply for a Visa. As many of you know, Al Qaeda has a strong presence in Europe and operates relatively freely throughout the EU. It would be quite easy for a group of Al Qaeda operatives from Europe to fly to the U.S. and enter a U.S. port with no problem at all. And the Bush Administration knows about these vulnerabilities and has refused to address them. It is almost as if the Bush folks are leaving the country vulnerable on purpose as a way to take advantage of any future attacks and to keep the country in fear, instead of taking sensible precautions....precautions that any responsible government would take to protect its people. You can't be this incompetent by accident. In fact, the U.S. gets rid of anyone who tries to blow the whistle about lapses in security.

There was also a failure to limit the number of American colleges taking part in the Student Visa program....to a more manageable number. As things stand now, any private trade school that crops up can become a Visa sponsoring organization.... creating a conveyor belt for terrorists to get into the country. This is on top of all of the legitimate Colleges and Universities in the system. A alternative that I suggested some time ago would involve restricting the number of schools in the Visa system and would limit the number of Visa issued, and at the same time, encouraging the establishment of more American colleges and Universities overseas.... reducing the need for foreign students from sensitive parts of the world to actually enter the U.S. to obtain a degree from an American school. Several U.S. Universities already have several campuses overseas. Another option would be to expand online degree options to foreign students.

This is what happens when political appointees are put in key positions, rather than professionals with the proper qualifications. The people in charge of U.S. Homeland Security, such as Michael Chertoff, Julie Myers and Frances Townsend for example, have no experience or expertise whatsoever in Security.... no experience actually working in the field. These people have worn suits and have sat behind desks their whole careers. We basically have several Michael Browns running our security apparatus. It's a complete joke. This is why our security priorities are out of order. It is also why I believe that we are doomed.... and have been left to the mercy of Al Qaeda and anyone else who wants to do us harm. We are going around the world making new enemies, but leaving our borders wide open. It's like being in a neighborhood full of enemies, and picking a fight with the neighbor down the street....and leaving your front and back door open while you are away from home. Or not checking your doors before you go to bed at night. I think most Americans check their doors to make sure they are locked and might even set an alarm before they go to bed at night. But as a country.... we have done the opposite.

What about the War On Terror? That whole thing is a hoax. There is no War On Terror. I know from firsthand experience that the U.S. government is not hiring for key areas... Hiring is being done by the ones, twos, threes, and by the tens, for several security related positions. This is why I have not been able to get a foot in the door, despite being qualified for entry level work. I have been dying to serve the country in a DHS position. If there was a real War On Terror, hiring would be taking place by the hundreds and in some cases by the thousands.

The "War On Terror" is more of an empty political slogan....something that sounds good and something that is easy to brand. But there is no substance behind the words. Unless the "War On Terror" simply refers to foreign military intervention and ignores domestic security (which most Americans should know by now has not worked).

_______________________

Related Links

U.S. Still Vulnerable To Attack- Clark Kent Ervin Interview

Homeland Insecurity Continues

Ft. Dix Terror Plot

Egyptian Students Fail To Report

Millions of Foreign Visitors Overstay Visas

Taliban Official Attending Yale University

Homeland Security Still Not Prepared

Homeland Security Official Reports Lapses in Immigration System