Why Do Extreme Right Wing Tea Party Republicans Look Alike! (Like Alfred E Newman)

(and share ties!)

(and bad rugs!)

Message to Fellow Latinos and Humanitarians: Republican Congress Planning ANTI Latino / Racial Profiling Bills in 2011!

Fellow Latinos and Humanitarians,
We may be upset by the Dream Act not passing and no movement with Comprehensive Immigration Reform, but if even half of the rhetoric I've been reading on the ANTI blogs comes to fruition, we are in for very tough times in 2011. The ANTI blogs are giddy with anticipation as their Tea Party Republican thugs are taking over the reins of Congress. These ANTI-Latino zealots are rubbing their hands together, making plans to propose racial profiling bills that make Arizona's racial profiling sb1070 look like a "tea party."
What bills are they planning on proposing in 2011?
1. Changing the 14th Amendment, ending Birthright Citizenship
2. Mandatory e-Verify
3. Official English
4. End to Sanctuary Cities
If you look at each of these proposed bills, something immediately jumps out at you. Each will blatantly and outrightly racially profile Latinos. It will be a witchhunt. Bad times for Latinos are clearly in the forecast ahead, especially with extreme right wing Tea Party Republicans like Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee, leading the charge!
Guest Voz Suzanne Gamboa provides additional insights:
The end of the year means a turnover of House control from Democratic to Republican and, with it, Congress' approach to immigration. In a matter of weeks, Congress will go from trying to help young, illegal immigrants become legal to debating whether children born to parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy automatic U.S. citizenship. Such a hardened approach -- and the rhetoric certain to accompany it -- should resonate with the GOP faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor. But it also could further hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012.

Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants will emerge early next session. That is likely to be followed by attempts to force employers to use a still-developing web system, dubbed E-Verify, to check that all of their employees are in the U.S. legally. There could be proposed curbs on federal spending in (Sanctuary) cities that don't do enough to identify people who are in the country illegally and attempts to reduce the numbers of legal immigrants. Democrats ended the year failing for a second time to win passage of the Dream Act, which would have given hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants a chance at legal status.

House Republicans will try to fill the immigration reform vacuum left by Democrats with legislation designed to send illegal immigrants packing and deter others from trying to come to the U.S. Democrats, who will still control the Senate, will be playing defense against harsh immigration enforcement measures, mindful of their need to keep on good footing with Hispanic voters. But a slimmer majority and an eye on 2012 may prevent Senate Democrats from bringing to the floor any sweeping immigration bill, or even a limited one that hints at providing legal status to people in the country illegally.

President Barack Obama could be a wild card. He'll have at his disposal his veto power should a bill denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants make it to his desk. But Obama also has made cracking down on employers a key part of his administration's immigration enforcement tactics.

Hispanic voters and their allies will look for Obama to broker a deal on immigration as he did on tax cuts and health care. After the Dream Act failed in the Senate this month, Obama said his administration would not give up on the measure. "At a minimum we should be able to get Dream done. So I'm going to go back at it," he said.
The president has taken heavy hits in Spanish-language and ethnic media for failing to keep his promise to address immigration promptly and taking it off the agenda last summer. His administration's continued deportations of immigrants -- a record 393,000 in the 2010 fiscal year -- have also made tenuous his relationship with Hispanic voters.

John Morton, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a recent conference call that there are no plans to change the agency's enforcement tactics, which are focused on immigrants who commit crimes but also have led to detaining and deporting many immigrants who have not committed crimes. The agency also will continue to expand Secure Communities, the program that allows immigration officials to check fingerprints of all people booked into jail to see if they are in the country illegally. Both illegal immigrants and residents can end up being deported under the program, which the Homeland Security Department hopes to expand nationwide by 2013.

Many of those attending a recent gathering of conservative Hispanics in Washington warned that another round of tough laws surrounded by ugly anti-immigrant discussions could doom the GOP's 2012 chances. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible 2012 candidate, cited Meg Whitman's failed gubernatorial bid in California despite her high spending. When 22 percent of the electorate is Latino, candidates can't win without a vigorous presence in the Hispanic community and a "message that is understandable and involves respect," Gingrich said. Even so, Gingrich was unwilling to call on his fellow Republican senators to drop their opposition to the Dream Act, saying the legislation should not have been considered without giving lawmakers a chance to amend it.

The next Congress will be populated with many newcomers elected on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement. They'll have ready ears in Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee. That's a recipe for more measures aimed at immigration enforcement, including requiring businesses to use E-Verify rather than eyeballing paper documents to check workers' citizenship and legal residency status.

"I've already told the business community it's going to happen," said Beto Cardenas, executive counsel to Americans for Immigration Reform, a coalition of business leaders who support overhauling immigration laws. Changes to immigration law contained in appropriations and authorization bills, where immigration enforcement hawks are likely to tuck some measures, would also be tough to reject. But more controversial measures such as attempts to deny citizenship to children of people who are in the U.S. without permission could be tempered by GOP leaders aware of the need to curry more favor with Hispanic voters.

Police Racism Causes American Latinos to Steer Clear of Connecticut Town! Cops say "You Spics Don't Have Rights Here!"

FoxNews reports: Hispanics are leaving East Haven in droves and their allegations paint an ugly picture of the small Connecticut suburb. Santiago Malavé has worked law enforcement jobs in Connecticut for more than four decades, but as a Puerto Rican, he says he cannot drive through his own town without worrying about police harassing him. Malavé, a probation officer who works in New Haven, says the racial abuse is so bad that he only crosses the town line into East Haven to go home. He and his wife are now preparing to sell their house and move, joining an exodus of Hispanics who say police have hassled them with traffic stops, false arrests and even jailhouse beatings.

The Justice Department has started a civil rights investigation, and the FBI recently opened a criminal probe. But that has not changed things on Main Street, where restaurants and stores that cater to Hispanics are going out of business. If the goal of police was to ruin East Haven's Hispanic community, some grudgingly say they have succeeded.

"We can't tolerate the town anymore," said Malavé, 64. "For us to leave our beautiful home is something that hurts, but we can't deal with these people." Racial profiling allegations began swirling about two years ago in East Haven, a predominantly Italian-American seaside suburb of about 28,000 people 70 miles northeast of New York City. Hispanics make up only about 7 percent of the population, but their numbers had been growing as the peaceful, small-town setting and thriving businesses attracted newcomers from Mexico and Ecuador.

Police Chief Leonard Gallo, who is on administrative leave, has denied the allegations. The office of acting Police Chief Gaetano Nappi referred calls to Town Attorney Patricia Cofrancesco, who did not respond to phone messages seeking comment. Hispanic business owners say police made a practice of parking outside their shops and stopping any Latinos. Some who complained say they faced retaliation.

Luis Rodriguez, an immigrant from Ecuador who owns the Los Amigos Grocery, said he was arrested two months ago and jailed for five days after a woman pointed out to police that his 3-year-old son was unsupervised on the sidewalk outside the store. He said police were out for revenge because his wife had been videotaping them. He was charged with child neglect; the case is still pending. Meanwhile, his store is up for sale. Ecuadorians used to travel from as far as Massachusetts for jalapenos, Ecuadorian sodas and other specialty products. But Rodriguez said police have scared customers away by threatening to alert immigration authorities if they ever saw them in town again. "If I had known the police in East Haven are so much trouble I never would have invested so much money here," said Rodriguez, 41, who has put more than $120,000 into the store.

The Justice Department's civil rights branch began investigating the police force in September 2009. It is still looking into alleged discriminatory policing, but it identified preliminary concerns in April over issues including outdated policies and a lack of clear guidance on the use of force. The town's mayor, April Capone, revealed this month that the FBI was gathering evidence for potential criminal prosecutions of some of the officers. Her office declined to comment.

Dermot Lynch, a student intern with Yale Law School's Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic, said the problem goes beyond a few rogue officers. "This is a systemwide leadership failure. It's going to need widespread reform," said Lynch, whose group filed a lawsuit in October on behalf of nine immigrants who say East Haven police abused them with beatings and unwarranted use of a stun gun. It also quotes officers using ethnic slurs.

Until recently, East Haven was considered a refuge by Hispanics, a suburb with ample parking and less crime than New Haven. Malavé, who has lived here since 1977, said he never had problems before late 2008 when police responded to a report by his wife that some money was missing. The couple had begun to argue. Malavé, who was asked his nationality, said police arrested him for disorderly conduct the minute he said he was born in Puerto Rico. "I tried to talk to the sergeant, but he said, `You spics don't have rights here,"' said Malavé, a former New Haven police officer.

Hispanics in East Haven say more than half their population -- estimated at 1,900 by the Census Bureau -- has moved away. Mario Marín, who was at work one recent afternoon in his family's empty restaurant, La Bamba, said two of his siblings moved to nearby Waterbury and another brother returned to Ecuador. He said one brother, like other Hispanic property owners, lost a house to foreclosure after his tenants moved away. "They destroyed our future here," Marín said of police. He said even out-of-town diners have stopped coming since officers launched raids on the restaurant's parking lot, towing away any cars with out-of-state license plates.

Marín and others said run-ins with police have been less common since police came under federal scrutiny. But activist John Lugo of Latinos United in Action, who helped organize a march against racial profiling last year, said his group still advises Hispanics to steer clear of East Haven.

The Life and Adventures of Santa - The Illegal Immigrant!

I saw Santa last night as he layed gifts under the tree!

His eyes -- how they twinkled! his dimples so merry!
His cheeks were like roses, his nose like a cherry!
He wore a sombrero and nice red suit
His white hair so fluffy, he looked very cute!

His droll little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
And the beard of his chin was as white as the snow;
He had a broad face and a little round belly,
That shook, when he laughed like a bowlful of jelly.
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread;
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
And filled all the stockings; then turned with a jerk,

Working so hard, Working to save!
Sending home dollars and always so brave!
I think he was illegal though I didn’t know for sure.
All I could see were his motives so pure.
No passport. No papers. He just dropped in.
I could hear the ANTIs say, “How dare him!!”


All the families received him just fine!
They embraced him and offered him wine.
I wondered if he heard all the rants!
Accountable for all illegals´accidents.

The Antis were angry! Would they post a website?
Would they call in Arpaio or ICE Raid tonight?
Thrown in a Detention Center with torture to bear?
Or jailed and forced to wear pink underwear?


I need not have worried. He was a wise man
This globalized guy. He did understand.
When he finished his work.
He filled all the stockings and turned with a jerk.
Then waving a finger, aside of his nose.
And giving a nod. Up the chimney he rose.
And as I heard him exclaim, as he drove out of site,
“Feliz Navidad to all and to all a goodnight.”

The Census Bureau Reports the Evolving Face of America with sharpest Increases in Latino Communities!

LOS ANGELES, CA – Today, the United States Census Bureau released its state-by-state total population results for the 2010 Census, and with them the number of seats each state receives in the U.S. House of Representatives under reapportionment for the 113th Congress, which convenes in January 2013. The results show the U.S. population growth almost exclusively in the Western and Southern states, which led to Congressional gains in those states and losses in the Midwest and Northeast.
This growth corroborated the recently released 2009 ACS 1-year population estimates, which showed substantial growth of the Latino community in these same Western and Southern States since the 2000 Census.
"The Census will show that more than one in seven people in the United States is Latino. Today's data coupled with recently-released Census Bureau estimates demonstrate that the Latino population has significantly influenced how congressional seats are apportioned among the states. Further down the road, the nation can expect to see a minimum of nine additional Latino-majority House seats, provided that states comply with the federal Voting Rights Act in redistricting," said Thomas A. Saenz, Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund President and General Counsel.

· The 2010 Census showed the nation grew 9.7% since 2000. Based on the Census Bureau’s 2009 ACS 1-Year Estimates, the Latino population grew 37% from 2000 to 2009, where the non-Latino White population grew less than 3%. Stated otherwise, Latinos made up 51% of the United States total population growth, compared to non-Latino White population contributing 21% of the U.S. total population growth.
· Based on the ACS data, in the following 16 states Latino population growth accounted for more than 60% of the state’s total population growth: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and West Virginia. Latino population growth represents more than half the state’s population growth in 21 states.

In the eight states that gained Congressional Districts under the 2010 Census, the 2009 ACS data show that, with the exception of Florida and Texas, the Latino population grew more than 55%. In Texas and Florida, the Latino population grew a respective 37.16% and 48.82%. These relatively lower percentages represent large figures, with the states growing by 2,478,390 and 1,309,582 Latinos respectively.
“These data show that Latinos brought seats to states gaining districts, and prevented many other states from losing districts. As a result, the upcoming redistricting should be respectful of the growing Latino political strength,” stated Nina Perales, Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund National Senior Counsel.

Other Notable Highlights:
Texas gained 4 Congressional Seats, showing a 21% population growth. According to the ACS, the Latino population grew 37% while the non-Latino White population grew 6%. This also shows that Latinos made up 63% of Texas’s population growth.

California for the first time since 1930 did not gain a Congressional Seat. California grew 10% since 2000. The ACS showed a 25% growth in the Latino community, and a 3% loss in non-Latino White population; The Latino community represented 88% of the total population growth.

Arizona and Nevada each gained 1 congressional district, for total growth rates of 25% and 35%. Each state posted respective Latino population gains of 57% and 78% according to the ACS; which further represented 50% and 48% of each state’s population growth.

Florida gained 2 congressional seats with its 18% in total population growth. Florida posted a 49% Latino population growth via the ACS.

Racist Fox News Latino Site Shouts Latino Stars are Having Anchor Baby!

And now, another reason to Boycott Fox News:
Fox News Latino, whose supposed mission is to cater to American Latinos, wrote the following headline about Penelope Cruz's pregnancy: "Penelope Cruz and Javier Bardem are Having an Anchor Baby!"

Spanish actress Penélope Cruz recently revealed that she’s planning on giving birth to her baby boy in Los Angeles. Shortly after Fox News Latino called her unborn child an “anchor baby” in a story titled “Penélope Cruz and Javier Bardem Are Having an Anchor Baby.”

Leave it to Fox News to insult Latinos in what is supposed to be their own magazine. In October 2010, Fox News launched “Fox News Latino”, a site dedicated to attracting a Latino audience. “We’re aiming at Latinos whose first language is English, who inform themselves in English, who are deeply American, but share some of the cultural sensibilities of their parents or grandparents,” the site’s managing editor, Alberto Vourvoulias-Bush, told the Miami Herald.

A group of Latino conservatives, Somos Republicans (“We Are Republicans”) is urging Fox to remove the story and apologize for using the term “anchor baby.”:
“Fox News Latino is being insensitive and their actions are reprehensible.The term ‘anchor baby’ is equivalent to other defamatory terms such as ‘wetback,’ ‘pickaninny’ and ‘tar baby.’ Media outlets should never use these demeaning terms in connection with precious babies, and it is unfortunate that we have to inform FOX News of this when they are typically viewed as conservative."
Fox News has cleansed the article from their websites even going to the lengths of removing their cached versions from search engines.

When Do Republicans and TeaPartiers Get Angry?

Guest Voz - Frank Sharry of America's Voice: We (Latinos/Humanitiarians) Will REMEMBER Those That Voted Against the DREAM Act/Latino Students!

Yesterday morning, in a procedural vote requiring 60 votes to advance the legislation, the U.S. Senate voted for the DREAM Act by a 55-41 margin, effectively shutting the doors of opportunity to thousands of bright and talented young people who grew up in America and wanted to give back to the country they call home.
Guest Voz - Frank Sharry Executive Director of America's Voice: “Yesterday morning we won a majority of votes in the Senate. Last week we won a majority of the votes in the House. But because of a Republican filibuster we needed 60 votes to pass DREAM and we fell short. To those who did the right thing and voted for DREAM, you had our back and we’ll have yours. But to the majority of Republicans and the handful of Democrats who voted against the best and the brightest of the Latino immigrant community, your vote against DREAM will be remembered as long as you are in politics. Many of you have expressed your sympathy for the DREAMers. But today we did not need your sympathy. We needed your vote.

As disappointed as we are in those who slammed the door of opportunity on talented young people who are Americans in all but paperwork, we are buoyed by the nationwide outpouring of support for this cause, the unprecedented mobilization in support of DREAM across the nation, and the leadership and courage of the DREAMers who came to Washington to insist on making their DREAM come true.

Where do we go from here? We will continue fighting, organizing, mobilizing and educating. We will continue to build an ever more powerful movement. We will continue to speak up and speak out for immigrant youth, for immigrant families, for immigration reform that embodies the best of our ideals rather than the worst of our fears.

We get stronger every day. We may have lost this battle, but in the war between justice and injustice, inclusion and exclusion, courage and cowardice, victory is not a matter of if, but a matter of when.”

REMEMBER THE FACES OF THE ANTI-LATINO DEMOCRATIC SENATORS WHO VOTED AGAINST THE DREAM ACT!

President Obama said Failure to Pass the DREAM Act "Incredibly Disappointing!"

President Obama called the Senate’s failure to pass the DREAM Act today “incredibly disappointing.” The bill failed to clear a Senate filibuster by a five-vote margin, dashing immigrant youth’s hopes of finally winning passage of a bill that would have benefited hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants. “As I said last week, when the House passed the DREAM Act, it is not only the right thing to do for talented young people who seek to serve a country they know as their own, it is the right thing for the United States of America,” Obama said in a statement. “There was simply no reason not to pass this important legislation. But my administration will not give up on the DREAM Act, or on the important business of fixing our broken immigration system,” said Obama, whose administration last year deported a record 392,000 people. Yesterday, senior officials from the Department of Homeland Security said that while they support the DREAM Act, they would not stop deporting DREAM Act-eligible youth in the event of its failure.

The DREAM Act would allow young undocumented immigrants to get on a long road to citizenship if they have a clean criminal record and dedicate two years to the military or higher education. There are an estimated two million undocumented youth in the country, and the Migration Policy Institute calculated that around 850,000 people would benefit from the DREAM Act. Every year, an estimated 65,000 undocumented youth graduate from high school.

“These young people are the next generation of doctors and lawyers, engineers and teachers, Congressmen and Senators—they must be part of the only nation they’ve ever called home,” said Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin in a written statement after today’s vote, adding that he would not abandon the DREAM Act. “As long as they are determined to be part of this great nation, I am determined to fight for them to call America home,” Durbin said. “As long as I am Member of Congress, the DREAM will be kept alive.”

The bill has been in existence for nearly a decade, though the particulars of it have changed through the years and steadily narrowed who would be eligible for citizenship under it. The DREAM Act has come up for a vote in Congress multiple times, most recently in 2007, and failed to clear filibuster threats in the Senate every time. It passed the House earlier this month.

“The DREAM Act would have reduced our deficit by $2.2 billion over the next 10 years, and would have created a pool of qualified patriots willing to defend our country at a time when our service members are exhausted by multiple deployments,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “But Republicans decided instead to play politics and waste the talent and commitment of these young men and women who want to give back to America.”

But Reid should have scolded members of his own party, too. Five Democrats—Sens. Max Baucus, Mark Pryor, Jon Tester, Ben Nelson and Kay Hagan—voted against the DREAM Act. West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat, did not vote.

“Our youth immigrant movement is not over,” said Felipe Matos, an undocumented immigrant who walked 1,500 miles from Miami to Washington, D.C., earlier this year to rally support for the DREAM Act. “We will keep organizing to defend the human and civil rights of all people.”

The DREAM ACT Vote FAILS due to Five Racist, ANTI-Latino Democratic Senators' Traitorism!

Look at the faces of these FIVE Racist Traitors. These DINO (Democrat in Name Only) slimy, disgusting Senators who voted NO Against Children, Voted NO Against Education, Voted NO Against Latinos! These are the faces of the 5 Democratic Senators that Voted NO against the DREAM Act!
Their Names: Ben Nelson, D-NE; Max Baucus, D-MT; Jon Tester, D-MT; Mark Pryor, D-AK; Kay Hagan, D-SC. It is funny. Their faces look like Republican faces! They truly are DINOs!

The Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of bypassing a filibuster of the DREAM Act, but fell five votes short on Saturday, dealing a harsh blow to the bill that would have allowed American Students who were brought to the United States as children by their undocumented parents -- to gain legal status. The final vote total was 55-41 -- well above what would be needed for the bill to pass in a normal vote.

Don't worry TRAITOROUS Senators, We LATINOS will REMEMBER .. Next Election Day!

The DREAM ACT: The Developmen­t, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act -- or DREAM Act -- would create a path to citizenshi­p for immigrants who were brought into the United States illegally as children under the age of 16 and have lived in America for at least five years, obtained a high school or General Education Developmen­t diploma and demonstrat­ed "good moral character.­" Even then, only a six-year conditiona­l status would be awarded, and before moving to the next phase, the students would need to meet additional requiremen­ts -- attending college or serving in the military for at least two years, and passing criminal background checks.

Are Minutemen Vigilantes Attacking the Border to Achieve Their Agenda? Guest Voz: Immigration Clearinghouse

Are Minutemen Vigilantes Attacking the Border to Achieve Their Agenda as per Minuteman X's Prediction?
Guest Voz: Immigration Clearinghouse: Border Patrol Agent killed in gunbattle in southern Arizona
A Border Patrol agent from the agency’s swat team was shot and killed Tuesday night in a gunbattle with suspected bandits south of Tucson. Agent Brian A. Terry, 40, was killed when he and fellow agents exchanged fire with a group of five people about 11 p.m. in a remote area west of Rio Rico, said FBI spokeswoman Brenda Nath. Four of the five suspected bandits were in custody Wednesday morning, including one man who was hospitalized with gunshot wounds, said agent Brandon Judd, president of the agents’ union in Arizona, Local 2544. The severity of his injuries is unknown.
Border Patrol agents and other law enforcers are searching for the fifth suspect in the area of the shooting, Nath said. Terry was shot by bandits, Judd said. Bandits are criminals who try to rip-off loads of drugs and people from smugglers. Terry and his fellow agents from the Bortac team were in the area where the shooting occurred because of the high levels of illegal activity involving armed border bandits. “It wasn’t a surprise encounter,” Judd said. “They knew what they were going into.” Border Patrol spokesman Eric Cantu declined to confirm Judd’s account.
Bandits are the lowest of the low among criminals operating along the border, despised even by the drug- and people-smuggling organizations, Judd said. “This is the biggest scum that you are going to run up against,” Judd said.
Something strange about the lack of information being released! Something strange going on here. Generally, when a crime occurs and arrests are made, the authorities are very quick to release the names of those in custody while giving themselves a pat on the back. Hasn’t happened here. Nothing about “illegal immigrants” committing this crime, not release of the names of those arrested.
Could it be this murder was committed by a group of border vigilantes preying on undocumented immigrants coming into this country? They’re out there with all their high tech GI Joey gear. Reminds me somewhat of the murder of Rancher Robert Krentz back in the summer. They blamed it on the illegal Mexicans but as time passed, it was leaked they were looking for someone north of the border. And as with the Krentz murder which helped to pass the draconian SB-1070, Agent Terry’s murder comes at a time when the DREAM ACT, a piece of legislation opposed by nativists and the uber stupidos, is very close to becoming law. Anyone believe in coincidences?
Wingnuts quick to fall on this story
All across the internet where this story is being reported, the wingnuts gun loons are ready to lock and load and head to the border. Yawwn….

Over at ALIPAC, Gheen suggested that the shooters were coming into the country to partake of the DREAM ACT. Several such uber stupid sentiments appearing here and there. Further proof that imbeciles seem to seek each other out. Read all the interesting nativist outrage HERE, but a warning, as befitting their intellectual level, the spelling is atrocious.

And our friend Ken Dreger, a wannabe border patrolman and current border vigilante who is part of BPAUX and who is fascinated with our efforts here, declared that he’s“Mad as Hell and Not Going To Take it any Longer!”
Part of his rant:
To say that I am a little upset now over another fine BP agent being killed after last year’s agent here in California would be putting it mildly. Americans (Who are paying attention) want and demand our borders secured from our nasty neighbor Mexico. We don’t really care what it takes to get it done, you can close down all the ports of entry and pull back 200,000 troops from South Korea if that is what it takes!

Hmm, “nasty Mexico”? Anyone ever seen Murrieta California?
Not drug cartels, low life thugs!

Brandon Judd, president of the agents’ union in Arizona, Local 2544, spoke of the events however, Border Patrol spokesman Eric Cantu declined to confirm Judd’s account.

T.J. Bonner , president of the 12,000-member National Border Patrol Council, said Terry was killed by “bandits” who roam areas along the border and steal from illegal immigrants coming into the United States.
Bonner said Terry and other agents were assigned to the area in response to reports of bandit activity. Bonner said bandits typically are not connected to cartels. Instead, they make their livings by preying upon others.
Bonner said the Border Patrol does not have a sense of how often bandits steal from immigrants, because immigrants are not likely to report illegal activity because they fear being deported. Border Patrol spokesman Eric Cantu declined to confirm Bonner’s account.

Our condolences go out to the Terry family, his parents, siblings and friends. And we’ll wait as more information is released before jumping to conclusions as others are doing.

Senator Bernie Sanders Goes to Washington and Advises President Obama to Stand Strong for the American People!

Reminiscent of Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," at 10:24 Friday morning, a righteous and earnest Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont took to the floor of the Senate to share a few thoughts about the tax-cut plan for the rich brokered by Republican leaders and a dejected President Obama, weak from Democratic losses during the recent election.
The proposed bill extends tax cuts for the rich for 2 years, long enough for the Republicans to take their shot at winning the Presidency in 2012. If this happens, their plan is to make the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. President Obama is agreeing to this plan, he says because he wanted tax cuts to continue for the middle class and the poor. He said this even though Democrats presented a bill to extend tax cuts for those making less than 1 million dollars. However Republicans quickly rejected that proposal. The weakened President accepted their proposal -- he says -- to continue tax cuts for the poor and middle class and extend for a mere 12 months the existing 79 - 99 weeks of unemployment for the unemployed instead of cutting them all off at 26 weeks. The Republicans claim to care about those unemployed, yet their so called big compromise merely extends the existing 79 - 99 weeks of unemployment for a paltry 12 months while we are still facing close to 10% unemployment is hardly a compromise, it is a necessity.
Sanders spoke for hours on end to an empty Senate floor, well after the sun had set and most of his colleagues had flown home, to share his heartfelt concerns for the American people if the proposed Tax Cut Bill for the Rich passes.
The bill, falsely presented as a bi-partisan recommendation, as Sanders said, "continues Tax Cuts for the rich, is loaded with bad trade deals and benefits the crooks on Wall Street." "China, China, CHINA!" he yelled at one point, stressing that the $14 trillion national debt was largely being financed by the Chinese government's decision to continue buying U.S. bonds. By early evening Sanders took to reading letters from constituents who had been hit hard by the Great Recession. Sanders yielded at times to Democratic colleagues who wanted to speak briefly against the plan, but otherwise he held the floor until nearly 7 p.m., his thick Brooklyn-born accent filling the chamber.
It looked a lot like a good old-fashioned filibuster, only Sanders wasn't actually stopping anything. Under a bipartisan deal reached Thursday, a vote would be held Monday on the tax deal no matter how long Sanders spoke or what he said Friday.
As Jefferson Smith (Jimmy Stewart from the movie) said: "I guess this is just another lost cause... they are the only causes worth fighting for. And (the good politicians in Washington) fought for them once, for the only reason any man ever fights for them; because of just one plain simple rule: 'Love thy neighbor.'... And you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any other. Yes, you even die for them."
Even as the hero, Senator Saunders spoke, President Obama brought in his old nemesis Bill Clinton, in to fight his battles for him. The President, looking down as Clinton spoke, dejected and humbled. As I saw this, I kept thinking, what would have happened if Hillary had been elected President and she brought in Bill to have this same talk to try and convince the American people this bill needs to be passed? Didn't Obama's supporters say this was their biggest fear? That Hillary will bring in Clinton for his second Presidency?
While I continue to be a strong supporter of our President, I, like many other of his supporters, feel he should be standing strong, particularly in this lame duck session. There is no need to give in to the Republicans who only support the Rich and care NOTHING about the Poor or Middle Class. Where he and the Dems should be standing strong: passing legislation to continue the existing unemployment weeks (79 - 99) extensions for unemployment until the unemployment rate is less than 8% for 6 months, until the end to Don't Ask Don't Tell and until the passage of the Dream Act once and for all.
I still support our President. I want our President to be strong and support the American people; to fight against those that oppose the American people. We want a President who is intelligent and diplomatic and viewed highly as a World Leader -- as he is capable of doing. I was not a supporter of President Bush or VP Cheney, but I do recall they did have the ability to stand strong and spit in the face of their opposition, particularly against the Democrats. They had no problem getting us into a wrongful war, borrowing trillions from China to fund it or passing the so called Patriot Act.
I was (and am) a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton. I believe she would NOT have had a problem standing up to the adversity that President Obama is currently facing. She has the cajones to face down her detractors and spit in their eye if needed. My wish for President Obama is to stand up for your supporters and STOP yelling at us and NOT the Republicans/Teapartiers that HATE you! Stand up and be our Champion. Quit relying on your panty-waist advisors and stand up for your heartfelt beliefs! Feel it in your Gut! Stand Strong!

Republican Palin calls fellow Republicans "Impotent" "Limp" "Weak"

Sarah Palin's "chonies were in a wad" as she called fellow Republicans "Impotent" "Limp" and "Weak!" Hmmmm ... Makes you wonder how she KNOWS this! (And You Want Palin to be our next President???)

Racist Back-Woods Republican Teapartier Luke Scott is a Birther!

Orioles Luke Scott: Obama Wasn't Born Here
In yet another example of why athletes should stick to the field of play and keep their mouths shut when it comes to real-life subjects, racist teapartier Luke Scott of the Baltimore Orioles admits he is a birther who doesn't think President Obama was born in the United States. On a radio show on Tuesday, David Brown of Yahoo's Big League Stew asked Scott, "You don't think that Obama wasn't born in the United States, do you?" "He was not born here," Scott replied. Brown then audibly sighed, and Scott went on a rant.

"I was born here. If someone accuses me of not being born here, I can go -- within 10 minutes -- to my filing cabinet and I can pick up my real birth certificate and I can go, 'See? Look! Here it is. Here it is.'" He went on for a couple of more minutes. "The man has dodged everything," Scott said of Obama. "He dodges questions, he doesn't answer anything. And why? Because he's hiding something."

The racist birther movement has been largely discredited ever since Obama produced a copy of his birth certificate during the 2008 campaign to prove he was indeed born in Hawaii. However, as much proof as the President and the Governor of Hawaii provide, none will be enough for back woodsers like Luke and other demented and racists Birthers.
More on Scott as a child banjo player:

Breaking News: HOUSE PASSES the DREAM ACT!

Washington (CNN) -- A hotly debated measure that offers a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children won approval Wednesday from the U.S. House. The 216-198 vote, mostly on partisan lines, sends the so-called DREAM Act to the Senate, where it was uncertain if supporters had the votes to overcome a certain Republican filibuster against it.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act -- or DREAM -- would create a path to citizenship for immigrants who entered the United States illegally as children under the age of 16 and have lived in America for at least five years, obtained a high school or General Education Development diploma and demonstrated "good moral character," according to a White House fact sheet. Even then, only a six-year conditional status would be awarded, and before moving to the next phase, the students would need to meet additional requirements -- attending college or serving in the military for at least two years, and passing criminal background checks. Proponents, including President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders, say the bill offers legal standing to young people brought to the United States who have bettered themselves and served their new country, while opponents claim it is a form of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Before Wednesday's House vote, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano joined congressional Democrats at a news conference to urge Congress to pass the bill. "These are not the individuals that are a threat to our public safety or our security," Napolitano said. "This is an area where ... our nation's immigration laws have not kept up with our nation's needs." The White House has touted the bill as a measure that will strengthen the nation's military and its economy.

Filipinos sue CA hospital over English-only rule

...And the supporters of the "English Only" laws said THIS (stifling speech in a public environment) would Never Happen!
LOS ANGELES – Dozens of Filipino hospital workers in California sued their employer Tuesday alleging they were the sole ethnic group targeted by a rule requiring them to speak only English.

The group of 52 nurses and medical staff filed a complaint accusing Delano Regional Medical Center of banning them from speaking Tagalog and other Filipino languages while letting other workers speak Spanish and Hindi.

The plaintiffs are seeking to join an August complaint filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Kern County federal court over the hospital's enforcement of a rule requiring workers to speak English.

Filipino workers said they were called to a special meeting in August 2006 where they were warned not to speak Tagalog and told surveillance cameras would be installed, if necessary, to monitor them. Since then, workers said they were told on a daily basis by fellow staffers to speak only English, even on breaks. "I felt like people were always watching us," said tearful 56-year-old Elnora Cayme, who worked for the hospital from 1980 to 2008. "Even when we spoke English ... people would come and approach us and tell us, 'English only.'" A message was left at the hospital seeking comment.

In its lawsuit, the EEOC has accused the hospital in California's San Joaquin Valley of creating a hostile working environment for Filipinos by singling them out for reprimands and for encouraging other staff to report them. The agency is seeking an injunction to protect the workers against future discrimination.

The EEOC has seen an increase in complaints alleging discrimination based on national origin amid a rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, said Anna Park, a regional attorney for the EEOC. That's especially the case in California's central valley, where a greater share of the complaints the agency receives relate to such issues than in the nation as a whole.

In this case, the current and former hospital workers filed a separate complaint under state law in part because monetary damages are capped by federal law, said Julie Su, litigation director for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, which represents the plaintiffs. They want the English-only policy to be changed and for hospital staff to be trained on the new rule. Under California law, employers may require workers to speak English if there is a business necessity, Su said. Delano Regional Medical Center is a 156-bed hospital located about 30 miles north of Bakersfield.

Elizabeth Edwards - An American Heroine - Died Today

Elizabeth Edwards, an American heroine, died today, after a lengthy battle with breast cancer. She was only 61 years old. Elizabeth was diagnosed with breast cancer shortly after her husband lost his bid for vice president in November 2004. It was later revealed that she knew before the election she might have cancer, but shielded her husband from the news during the campaign. She immediately underwent treatment, and the cancer was believed to be in remission.

Dr. Lisa Carey, the oncologist treating Elizabeth, categorized the cancer as metastatic stage four cancer, largely confined to the bones. Despite the diagnosis, Edwards said she was ready to go on with life. "Either you push forward with the things that you were doing yesterday or you start dying," she said. "If I had given up everything that my life was about ... I'd let cancer win before it needed to."

Elizabeth Edwards was born Mary Elizabeth Anania on July 3, 1949, in Jacksonville, Florida. Her father was a Navy pilot, and in her early years, she attended school in Japan. She attended the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, and met her future husband, John, while studying at UNC's law school. They spent their first date dancing at a local Holiday Inn, and it ended with John kissing Elizabeth on the forehead. "It was just really sweet," she said of the kiss. "I wasn't used to men being sweet." The couple was married July 30, 1977, the Saturday after they took their state bar exams. They had four children: Wade, Cate, Emma Claire, and Jack. Wade Edwards was killed in a car accident in 1996.

Mrs. Edwards worked as a clerk for U.S. District Judge Calvitt Clarke Jr. in Norfolk, Virginia, and was a very successful bankruptcy lawyer in Raleigh. In 2006, after her initial cancer diagnosis, she wrote "Saving Graces: Finding Solace and Strength from Friends and Strangers," which chronicled the aftermath of her son's death and her battle with the disease. When her cancer returned in 2007, she continued her political and "support for humanitarian causes" life. Her actively political husband John who ran for President, had a disasterous affair which ended his political career. Elizabeth Edwards, a truly strong and herioc American, through every difficulty, including her son's death, her husband's affair, and her severe illness said her husband's incident helped her focus on resuming her role as an advocate for the poor and for health care reform. She also said it pushed her to refocus on her role as a mother. (Note: Elizabeth Edwards strength and fortitude is truly, truly a role model for any of us who may ever face adversity!)

She also said she did not want her husband's tarnished public image to overshadow his role as an advocate for the poor -- particularly in the eyes of her children. "I have to prepare for the possibility if I die before they are grown" to make them "able to function without an involved, engaged and admiring parent," she said. "So I need to create the picture for them that I want them to have."

She said living with stage four cancer "is like dancing with a partner who keeps changing. Fortunately with the research, it looks like there may be a new drug for me down the line," she said. "My job is to stay alive until they find a cure. I don't think there's any way to live with this diagnosis than to have that kind of optimism."

The Proud and the Strong Ms. Edwards passed away today. We truly, truly lost an American Heroine! May God Bless Her as she passes on to the next stage. (Elizabeth, we will MISS You, Love, Dee)

Note to commenters: Today is our day to honor Elizabeth (our HERO) for her heroism and her strength. No negative comments about her husband will be published. Today is Elizabeth's day!

Guest Voz - Theaverment (Commenter on HP): Defining the Meaning of "The Good Old Days" for the Rich

I was reading this article on HP regarding "Senate Republicans Defeat Reauthorization of Jobless Aid, Tax Cuts" and I came across this very interesting comment by a Commenter by the name of "Theaverment." He has quite an interesting perspective!!

Guest Voz: Theaverment
There is a much misused phrase that starts off with "... is what made America great"

I say misused because the part that comes before it is almost always incorrect such as, "The Free Market", or "The Middle Class".

Furthermor­e, it is not America that has become great... just the powers that be.

It would be more realistic if we called it as it truly is, for example:
. Manifest Destiny made certain Americans wealthy.
. Slavery in the South made certain Americans wealthy.
. Jim Crow laws kept certain Americans wealthy.
. No unions, or no collective bargaining­, made certain Americans wealthy.
. No child labor laws and unsafe working conditions made certain Americans wealthy.
. Steel and railroad monopolies made certain Americans wealthy.
. Government tax dollars bailing out FAILED Capitalist­ic and so called Free Market ventures made certain Americans wealthy.
. Speaking softly and carrying a big stick and our involvemen­t in taking advantage of the resources of other countries made certain Americans wealthy.

These really are the things that supposedly made America great. It is just propaganda that has people think otherwise. The Middle Class in this country was a mistake and only occurred out of the necessitie­s of WWII and the complete failure of Capitalism and speculatio­n that was the Great Depression­.

Since then the wealthy have been trying to get back to the good ole days... if this type of legislatio­n continues they will have them.

Republicans Vote AGAINST Middle Class and Poor!

The Republicans have OUTED themselves! They have voted NO against extending tax cuts for the middle class and the poor. They have also voted NO all year against extending unemployment compensation for the unemployed, unable to find jobs and now with nothing! And still unemployed.


It is clear. The party of NO is AGAINST the American Poor -- the Middle Class and the Poor.

It is Clear. They are ONLY supporting the wealthiest, those that load their Political Action Committee with Dollars! With those foreign donors that anonymously donate to them through groups like the Chambers of Commerce.

SHAME on the Republican Party and ALL that support them. This is their time of SHAME!

Breaking News: Reports are coming in that Republicans are planning on filibustering against the Start Treaty, or any relief for the poor UNTIL the tax cuts for the richest 2% are passed.

Anyone who supports Republicans should HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME!

Guest Voz - Robert Reich: The Big Economic Story, and Why Obama Isn't Telling It

These are the two competing stories Americans are telling one another.
Yes, I know: It's more complicated than this. In reality, the lousy economy is due to insufficient demand -- the result of the nation's almost unprecedented concentration of income at the top. The very rich don't spend as much of their income as the middle. And since the housing bubble burst, the middle class hasn't had the buying power to keep the economy going. That concentration of income, in turn, is due to globalization and technological change -- along with unprecedented campaign contributions and lobbying designed to make the rich even richer and do nothing to help average Americans, insider trading, and political bribery.

So B is the truth.
But A is the story Republicans and right-wingers (& Teapartiers) tell. It's a dangerous story because it deflects attention from the real problem and makes it harder for America to focus on the real solution -- which is more widely shared prosperity. (I get into how we might do this in my new book, Aftershock.)

A is also the story President Obama is telling, indirectly, through his deficit commission, his freeze on federal pay, his freeze on discretionary spending, and his wavering on extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
Most other Washington Democrats are falling into the same trap.

If Obama and the Democrats were serious about story A they'd at least mention it. They'd tell the nation that income and wealth haven't been this concentrated at the top since 1928, the year before the Great Crash. They'd be indignant about the secret money funneled into midterm campaigns. They'd demand Congress pass the Disclose Act so the public would know where the money comes from.

They'd introduce legislation to curb Wall Street bonuses -- exactly what European leaders are doing with their financial firms. They'd demand that the big banks, now profitable after taxpayer bailouts, reorganize the mortgage debt of distressed homeowners. They'd call for a new WPA to put the unemployed back to work, and pay for it with a tax surcharge on incomes over $1 million.

They'd insist on extended unemployment benefits for log-term jobless who are now exhausting their benefits. And they'd hang tough on the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy -- daring Republicans to vote against extending the cuts for everyone else.

But Obama is doing none of this. Instead, he's telling story A.
Making a big deal out of the deficit -- appointing a deficit commission and letting them grandstand with a plan to cut $4 trillion out of the projected deficit over the next ten years -- $3 of government spending for every $1 of tax increase -- is telling story A.

What the public hears is that our economic problems stem from too much government and that if we reduce government spending we'll be fine.
Announcing a two-year freeze on federal salaries - explaining that "I did not reach this decision easily... these are people's lives" -- is also telling story A.

What the public hears is government bureaucrats are being paid too much, and that if we get the federal payroll under control we'll all be better off.
Proposing a freeze on discretionary (non-defense) spending is telling story A. So is signaling a willingness to extend the Bush tax cuts to the top. So is appointing his top economic advisor from Wall Street (as apparently he's about to do).

In fact, the unwillingness of the President and Washington Democrats to tell story B itself promotes story A, because in the absence of an alternative narrative the Republican story is the only one the public hears.
Obama's advisors explain that the president's moves are designed to "preempt" the resurgent Republicans -- just like Bill Clinton preempted the Gingrich crowd by announcing "the era of big government is over" and then tacking right.

They're wrong. By telling story A and burying story B, the president legitimizes everything the right has been saying. He doesn't preempt them; he fuels them. He gives them more grounds for voting against raising the debt ceiling in a few weeks. He strengthens their argument against additional spending for extended unemployment benefits. He legitimizes their argument against additional stimulus spending.
Bill Clinton had a rapidly expanding economy to fall back on, so his appeasement of Republicans didn't legitimize the Republican world view. Obama doesn't have that luxury. The American public is still hurting and they want to know why.

Unless the President and Democrats explain why the economy still stinks for most Americans and offer a plan to fix it, the Republican explanation and solution -- it's big government's fault, and all we need do is shrink it -- will prevail.
That will mean more hardship for tens of millions of Americans. It will make it harder to remedy the bad economy. And it will set Republicans up for bigger wins in the future.

Guest Voz - Minuteman X: The Demise of BPAUX MCCI Minutemen!

Guest Voz - Minuteman X (just received today!): "I just received an update on the BPAUX MCCI Minutemen. They are on the verge of being evicted from their camp in San Diego and are attempting to move their whole money making operation to Arizona because they feel they can generate more donations there with current anti-immigrant sympathies running so strong. The leaders of the BPAUX are also apparently under investigation for weapons trafficking in San Diego. It has long been suspected that their real motive for positioning themselves so close tot he border was profiting from the weapons and possibly narcotics trade plaguing the area. More to come on this."

HATE CRIME: Swastika-Shaving Case To Be First Test Of New Hate Crimes Law Named For Matthew Shepard

Swastika-Shaving Case To Be First Test Of New Hate Crimes Law Named For Matthew Shepard
FARMINGTON, N.M. — Three friends had just finished their shifts at a McDonald's when prosecutors say they carried out a gruesome attack on a customer: They shaped a coat hanger into a swastika, placed it on a heated stove and branded the symbol on the arm of the mentally disabled Navajo man. Authorities say they then shaved a swastika on the back of the 22-year-old victim's head and used markers to scrawl messages and images on his body, including "KKK," `'White Power," a pentagram and a graphic image of a penis.

The men have become the first in the nation to be charged under a new law that makes it easier for the federal government to prosecute people for hate crimes. The case also marked the latest troubling race-related attack in this New Mexico community, prompting a renewed focus among local leaders on improving relations between Navajos and whites. The defendants are accused of violating the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act and could face 10 years in prison if convicted. The sentences could be extended to life if the government proves kidnapping occurred.

Federal prosecutors say they were able to bring the case because the 2009 law eliminated a requirement that a victim must be engaged in a federally protected activity, such as voting or attending school, for hate crime charges to be leveled. The law also expanded civil rights protections to include violence that is based on gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity. The swastika branding has also put the spotlight back on Farmington, a predominantly white community of about 45,000 residents near the Navajo Nation.

Simpsons Show Tells the Truth About Fox News! What will O'Reilly/Ailes do to Punish Them & Squelch Their Freedom of Speech?

rawstory.com reports: For the second week in a row, the popular cartoon "The Simpsons" mocked the Fox News Channel, implying those under the age of 75 should not watch the channel. The show, which is broadcast by Fox Broadcasting, flaunted a Fox News helicopter inscribed with a fictional slogan, "Fox News: Unsuitable For Viewers Under 75" during the opening scene.

News Corporation owns the Fox Broadcast network as well as Fox News Channel. It was the only reference to Fox News in the entire episode. Last Sunday's episode contained a Fox News helicopter with the motto, "Fox News: Not Racists, But #1 With Racists."

In that episode, the Fox News helicopter was carrying a Fox News executive. After the executive steps out of the helicopter onto the head of the Statue of Liberty, the helicopter goes into a tailspin and crashes, with the pilots lamenting, "It's not fair, we're unbalanced."

The executive proceeds to conduct a secret meeting where his team plans a new health care scare that will send their ratings through the roof. At one point in the episode, the likeness of former Vice President Dick Cheney laments the lack of terrorist attacks on America.

In response, Bill O'Reilly of Fox News called the show's creators "pinheads." "Continuing to bite the hand that feeds part of it, Fox Broadcasting once again allows its cartoon characters to run wild," O'Reilly complained on his show.

Republicans (Party of No!) Delaying Passage of START (resulting in Nuclear Proliferation) to Continue their Own Agenda!

On Meet the Press this morning, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) made it very clear that Republicans prefer to push their top two agenda items (1. Tax Cuts for the Rich; 2. Defeat Obama in 2012) even if it means risking Nuclear Proliferation.

Kyl said he would not vote for the passage of the new START Treaty in the upcoming vote during the Lame Duck session. His excuse: "We don't have enough time." However, his argument is bogus. It ignores the fact that the treaty has already been exhaustively vetted. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee conducted 18 hearings and five briefings and the Obama Administration answered 900 submitted questions during the committee's process this summer. In September, with a bipartisan vote of 14 to 4, the committee recommended ratification of the treaty. It would only take two to three days for the Senate to consider and vote on ratification. The START I treaty had only 5 days of Senate floor debate, the SORT treaty two days, the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty two days and the Chemical Weapons Convention two days.

Republican Kyl has shown a real unwillingness to get the ball rolling with respect to START. He clearly is attempting to make this a partisan issue and is instead promoting continued tax cuts for the top 2% of richest Americans.

Republican Kyl continues to lead the charge for the "Party of No!" Weeks prior to his appearance on "Meet the Press," Kyl demanded that the administration include additional funds for nuclear weapons modernization as part of the overall package. When the White House acquiesced, his complaints about the measure focused on the need to ensure U.S. nuclear weapons deterrence. Those concerns have been called overblown by the treaty's defenders. But as the clock has continued to tick, both Kyl and others in the GOP tent have been handed another reason to drag their feet: a closing window for consideration in the lame duck Congress.

The possible derailment of the Senate ratification of the new START treaty signed by President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April may be devastating. If a handful of primarily Republican U.S. senators succeed in their efforts to block ratification of the New START treaty this year, we face losing Russia's support and partnership for tough sanctions on Iran and securing all nuclear materials globally so they don't fall into the hands of terrorists. The nuclear terrorism is the most urgent threat we face today and locking down all nuclear materials is a national security imperative. But without Russia's cooperation in those goals, an effective international effort may be impossible to achieve.

On Meet the Press, Kyl would NOT address his reasons for opposing this vitally needed treaty. Kyl sneered when he talked saying he needed more time and Harry Reed's "pushing so many other initiatives in so short a time." His sneer was largest when he spoke of his opposition to "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and "The Dream Act" during the lame duck session. His sneering reflected his extremely ANTI Gay / Latino biases.

Later in the program, Kyl was asked about his cohort, Mitch McConnell's quote "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president" (not the Economy, Jobs, the American People) Kyl laughed and said it was just political.

The START Treaty is supported by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen; high-ranking members of the Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, H. W. Bush, Clinton, and W. Bush administrations -- including such national security experts as George Shultz, Henry Kissinger, James Baker and Brent Scowcroft; the current commander and seven former commanders of U.S. Strategic Command and the entire current U.S. military leadership. Admiral Mullen said the treaty "allows us to retain a strong and flexible American nuclear deterrent.... I believe, and the rest of the military leadership in this country believes, that this treaty is essential to our future security.... I hope the Senate will ratify it quickly."

Given the stakes and urgency for our national security, our Senators should be able to spare two to three days to consider and vote on the New START treaty before they break for the Christmas holiday. Certainly, a ratified new START treaty would be ample reason to celebrate the New Year.

Guest Voz-- Mitchell Bard: Why Sarah Palin's North Korea Flub Matters!!

Guest Voz-- Mitchell Bard: Why Sarah Palin's North Korea Flub Matters
Sarah Palin provided prime material for news outlets and comedy programs when she said on Glenn Beck's radio show Wednesday: "But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies."
If she hasn't already, I'm sure Palin will say that the "elitist," "lamestream" media is doing her wrong, and that she is once again a victim of "gotcha journalism." And Palin's small but passionate group of supporters will undoubtedly argue that Palin made an honest slip of the tongue, something that could happen to any of us. Her supporters are right. Saying "North" instead of "South" is something that any of us could easily do.

But here's the thing: Any of us did not stand up two years ago and claim we were qualified to fill a job that is a heartbeat away from the American presidency. We haven't written books, made speeches, endorsed candidates and spoke to the (mostly right-wing) media as if we were policy experts. And we haven't been scouting office space in Iowa for a 2012 presidential run. In short, more should be expected of Sarah Palin than any of us, based on how she has portrayed herself, and how she is treated by the media.

The real story, though, isn't that Palin said "North" instead of "South." Let's be honest: Vice President Joe Biden could have just as easily blown a line like that. No, the real story is that Palin was discussing a complex, precarious, highly dangerous issue as if she were an expert, even though she clearly isn't. Does anyone outside of Palin's relatively small group of smitten followers honestly believe that she is competent to act as an expert on Korean policy? That she knows the intricacies and risks of engaging with the North Koreans? That she understands the possible leadership struggle going on there? Do you think she has the first clue about the history of Korea over the last century? Do you think she's ever heard of Syngman Rhee, the Bodo League massacre, the Battle of Inchon, or National Security Council Report 68, or that she knows about the decades of Japanese rule in Korea? Do you think she's ever read about the role the propaganda efforts of the post-Stalin Soviet government played in the eventual armistice that ended the fighting?
Doubtful, at best.

Now, do you doubt for a second that Joe Biden could reel off a dissertation-level analysis of these issues from the top of his head? That's the real story about the Palin flub about North Korea that the media isn't covering. It's not that she misspoke, but that anyone cared what she had to say on the issue in the first place. Sarah Palin, with her reliance on spouting talking points, simplistic approach to issues and complete lack of experience beyond a half term as governor of a state the size of Columbus, Ohio, is not competent to be discussing North Korea. And shame on any media outlet that treats her opinions as if they're worth anything.

The real damning Palin quote in the Beck interview is the one in which she worries if "the White House is gonna come out with a strong enough policy to sanction what it is that North Korea's gonna do." Putting aside her usual butchering of the English language, she takes a complicated problem facing the United States (and the world) and reduces it to a talking-point political attack on the president.

Her comment reveals that she has no understanding that we are dealing with a North Korean leadership that may not be rational and may even be self-destructive. And one with the firepower to kill legions of South Korean civilians. To her simplistic, politics-driven approach, it's only about how the Democratic president isn't tough enough. (As an aside, she is talking about a president who has increased troops in Afghanistan, stepped up drone attacks on the enemy, and taken out more Taliban and al Qaeda leaders than George W. Bush ever did, but I digress... )

She recklessly portrays the North Korea crisis as one that is simple and only requires American strength, when, in reality, it is a difficult-to-solve issue fraught with danger. It is complicated and nuanced, and one wrong move could lead to an attack on Seoul. I wonder if Palin would be so cavalier in her approach if North Korea's missiles could reach Anchorage, Dallas or some other city in Real America?
And this person wants to be president? It's a joke.

Palin's "North"-for-"South" flub matters, but not because she misspoke. It matters because we, as a country, are acting as if she is some kind of policy expert, when, in reality, she is simple-minded and ignorant. She can say the wrong name, just like us. But just like most of us, she has no business acting like she understands the North Korea crisis in the first place.

President Obama's Beautiful Family - "Obama Girls"

BREAKING NEWS: Congressional Hispanic Caucus Member Clips President During Basketball Game And They are Still Friends!

The blogs are all abuzz! President Obama received 12 stitches after suffering an injury during a basketball game today. What Happened? and Who did it?

What Happened -- According to a White House statement:
"After being inadvertently hit with an opposing player's elbow in the lip while playing basketball with friends and family, the President received 12 stitches today administered by the White House Medical Unit. They were done in the doctor's office located on the ground floor of the White House." (Don't worry, the President is fine, just a sore lip.)

Who did it? It was none other than Reynaldo (Rey) Decerega, the Senior Programs Manager at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Now, Now Rey. The President and Vice President have already agreed to put their full support behind passing the Dream Act during the Lame Duck. No need to get rough. (Just Kidding!) We are glad you and the President are still Friends!

ITWAMA has just Friended you on Facebook and we look forward to hearing much more about you in the days ahead!

Remembering Amazing Family Thanksgiving Recipes

Thanksgiving has always been my favorite Holiday. It is a family day. It is a time where families come together to celebrate their love for one another.

When I was a little girl, we had amazing celebrations. We were very poor, but being poor didn't matter. My mother and her "comadres" planned their Thanksgiving feasts weeks in advance. On Holidays, specialities were on the menu. This was our chance to have Tamales, Barbacoa and Menudo. These were delicacies for us in Michigan. They were not every day menu items. Sure we ate tortillas, rice and beans on a frequent basis, but the delicacies were left for special times. It wasn't that they were expensive, it was just that they were either time consuming to make or the meats in the menu items were difficult to come by in Michigan. Of course, nowadays, you can buy these delicacies at your local Taco Cabana or Mexican Restaurant or buy the ingredients at your local Kroger or Wal-Mart.


Tamales were time consuming to make. My mother rarely made them alone for our family. Usually she brought in her comadres from the neighborhood. Each would bring an ingredient. One group would bring the corn husks. Another would bring the corn masa harina. My mother usually made huge pots of meat mixture, usually made from pork. The women gathered around the table. Each had a stack of cleaned/soaked corn husks. Bowls of masa were made and pots of the prepared meat mixture were placed on the table. An assembly line formed around the table. First the corn husks were pasted with masa in a very correct method. You could not layer it too thickly for fear of making your tamales too doughy. Next, the meat was layered. This was also very precise. You could have meaty tamales, but not too meaty for fear you'd run out of meat. Next, each tamale was carefully wrapped in a tight wrap. Finally, the tamales were place round and round in a huge stock pot or canner, layer after layer and layer until the pan was filled. When many ladies came, we had four or five huge pots filled to the brim. After they were cooked, each lady took home 5 or 6 dozen for their families holiday meal. Delicious.


I also loved Barbacoa. We rarely had it. The old traditional recipe for barbacoa was to make it from the meat of a cow's head. Back then, in Michigan, you could never buy a cow's head at a grocery store. My father did have a few farmer friends and I remember a few times being shocked at the site of a frozen cow's head in our freezer. When preparing barbacoa, my mother slow cooked the head in the oven until the meat just fell off the bone. She used very little spices, mostly tender loving care. There was a simplicity to it. The taste was unbelievable, moist and tender. My father liked to save the cow tongue for sandwiches later. As far as the cow brains, my father said they were a delicacy and if you ate them, they made you smarter.


Menudo was another great treat. Many people call menudo a "hangover cure." It certainly has a unique taste. It's made with tripe (and sometimes pig's feet), white hominy, onions and spices -- especially chili powder. The tripe had to be carefully cleaned and soaked. This was a long, laborious process. After the cleaning and cutting of the tripe, then my mother combined all the ingredients in a pot and let it cook and simmer for hours before the taste was just right. You could only eat corn tortillas with menudo and my mother always chopped up fresh onions and lemon with it.


On Thanksgiving days, after church, our huge family gathered around the table, said a prayer, each announced what we were thankful for, and ate our delicacies. Turkey and corn dressing were always included in the menu, ending with one of my mother's amazing deserts. We only ate one meal on Thanksgiving Day, but often, it was the best meal of the year. And we, as a family, were all very Thankful!