Hate Monger Dobbs Goes LOCO and Outs Himself as a Racist!

Lou Dobbs has officially gone LOCO! On Tuesday night, Dobbs outed himself as a RACIST against all American Latinos. He also made it known that he is adamantly against our President Obama.

The Washington Independent reports:

In another fascinating segment from CNN’s immigrant attack dog Lou Dobbs, the prime-time anchor Tuesday night accused President Obama of pandering to Latinos by talking about education to a group who he says goal is “to export drugs and illegal aliens to the United States.”
“I don’t know what’s happened to this White House,” Dobbs said, after correspondent Lisa Sylvester reported on Obama’s presentation at the annual conference of the U.S.-Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. “But the wheels appear to have come completely off here over the last several days. Making a decision to talk about a national initiative on education from the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, which is effectively an organization that is interested in the export of American capital and production to Mexico and Mexico’s export of drugs and illegal aliens to the United States. This is crazy stuff.”
Crazy stuff indeed.
For the record, here’s the mission statement of the U.S.-Hispanic Chamber of Commerce:
“To foster Hispanic economic development and to create sustainable prosperity for the benefit of American society.”

From the Houston Chronicle:

The pro-immigrant group America's Voice came down hard on Dobbs Wednesday:
The following is a response by Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America's Voice.
"Lou Dobbs is right about one thing. This is crazy stuff. Apparently when Lou saw the word 'Hispanic' in the name of the organization hosting the event, he went LOCO."
"The U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce is hardly a controversial group. It represents over 2.5 million Hispanic-owned businesses in the United States, including many small enterprises that are the backbone of our economy. I have worked with them over the years. It is a mainstream organization whose members are patriotic Americans - some born here, some born in Latin America - who love this nation. Linking these hardworking business owners, who are Americans of Hispanic descent, to the Mexican drug trade and illegal immigration is both ridiculous and deplorable."

Breaking News: DOJ to Conduct Special Investigation into Arpaio's Civil Rights Violations! Ole Joe to Finally Receive Justice!

BREAKING NEWS:

WASHINGTON - Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers announced he will conduct a hearing in April to examine the conduct of Sheriff Joe Arpaio for civil rights abuses. The investigation will include accusations of Racial Profiling. Local Mayors, officials and citizens charged Arpaio and his volunteer (masked) deputies racially profiled Latinos when they conducted sweeps of Latino neighborhoods in the Phoenix area looking for illegal immigrants. Conyers said the hearing will also examine other possible abuses of the 287(g) program that allows local police departments to enforce federal immigration laws.

The Justice Department's civil rights division said in a letter to Arpaio this week that he is under investigation for an alleged pattern of discriminatory police practices and of discrimination based on national origin.

The honorable Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, who asked for a federal investigation of Arpaio a year ago, said Tuesday he is encouraged that one has finally begun. "One year ago, I raised questions and concerns about possible civil rights violators by the sheriff against American citizens, military veterans and immigrants of every legal status, based on skin color," Gordon said in a written statement. "Since that time, we have seen an encouraging and dramatic turnaround in attitude at the U..S. Department of Justice. We should all be encouraged that our new attorney general is taking these issues seriously and this is the right thing to do."

Various Civil Rights organizations, including the NCLR, the National Immigration Forum and America's Voice have stated: "—“For some time we have been concerned about Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s abuse of authority under Maricopa County’s 287(g) contract with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Arpaio has made it clear that he and his deputies have little regard for due process, civil liberties, and their obligation to protect all residents of Maricopa County. We look with hope to the Civil Rights Division investigation. We hope that the Department of Justice will send a signal to local law enforcement agencies throughout America and restore the rule of law to Maricopa County. This is long overdue.”

Perhaps now we will see Justice occur, especially for those little girls who were terrorized by Arpaio and his masked henchmen during their Confirmation Mass.

References:

Congress to probe alleged abuses by Sheriff Arpaio

Congress schedules Arpaio hearing for April

Leading Republican Strategist Rebukes Mass Deportation saying Restrictionist Agenda Jeopardizes Republicans' Future!

I've said for years the concept of Mass Deportation (or as the ANTI's call it, "Amnesty" or "self-repatriation through attrition") is Wrong! Now, Richard Nadler, a Leading Republican Strategist, writing for the very Conservative National Review, makes my point for me! He is standing up to Mark Krikorian, Pat Buchanan, Phyllis Schlafly and other Republican demagogues who have been charging their nativist rhetoric promoting Mass Deportation.

Against Mass Deportation - by Richard Nadler, My Summarization:

Richard Nadler is against Mass Deportation. His critics chastise him saying his opposition to Mass Deportation is actually pandering to Latinos and business groups resulting in his abandoning Republican core principles.

Nadler disagrees. Mass Deportation is not a Republican core principle. Rather, the leaders of the Restrictionist Movement (e.g. Pat Buchanan, Schlafly, etc) set out to restructure Republican Core Values to their own extremist views. These leaders experimented with various strategies, including: official English, Fair trade, Nativism, etc. They thought this would be a successful wedge issue. They wanted Working Class Democrats to swing over into either a reformed Republican party or a new “third force." Pat Buchanan had tried this strategy in his earlier Presidential campaigns and it didn't work then. He resurrected it after 9-11. He thought the national-security fears widely shared by all Americans could be fused with anti-immigrant, anti-capitalist, and even anti-war populism. Hispanic “invaders” and their wicked employers might be the bogeymen needed to cement the commitment of the American worker to the conservative nation-state. If talk-show passion and book sales were indicative, the mix was a sure winner. Major groups, notably the Eagle Forum, signed on to the new project, and many others went along for the ride.

The ride was short. Their restrictionist strategy alienated not only Latino voters, but many independent and Progressive voters as well. The sheer radicalism of mass deportation caused an anti-conservative backlash within entire industries, many of them traditionally Republican — farmers, ranchers, non-union contractors, restaurateurs, orchard horticulturalists, hospitality providers, etc. This reaction imploded the Republican party in the Southwest and Florida, damaged it severely in the West, and weakened it everywhere. Nevertheless, sponsors of the mass deportation campaign continue to wage a disinformation campaign (e.g. LIES) to mask the meaning and magnitude of the disaster their project unleashed on the conservative movement.

RESTRICTIONIST LIES:

Restrictionist LIE #1: The deportationist cause (Restrictionism) lost no ground in the 2008 election.

. In the Senate, seven Republicans (eight counting Norm Coleman) who voted on June 28, 2007, to block the Bush administration’s immigration bill either retired or were defeated.

Restrictionist LIE #2: “Attrition through enforcement” is categorically different from “mass deportation.” (I love this one because I say it all the time!)

. Mark Krikorian makes this distinction: Instead of “roundups,” he would reduce the illegal population through “consistent, comprehensive application of the law — something we have never really attempted.”
But that is not what Mark, or any other “enforcement only” enthusiast, advocates. Mark knows full well that the applicable law must be radically changed in order to remove illegals in significant numbers. And he advocates such changes: a mandatory form of data-based employment verification; steep increases in penalties on recalcitrant employers; a vast increase in federal detention capacity; a vast increase in mandatory cooperation between recalcitrant municipal governments and federal authorities; a vast increase in the capacity of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to perform workplace raids; the criminalization of most categories of illegal residence; and the criminalization of whole new categories of harboring and assisting illegals.The basic tools of mass removal are the same, whether one calls the process “deportation” or “attrition.” In either case, a number of forceful actions by government against illegals, their employers, and/or their sympathizers are presumed to induce mass fear among the illegals themselves, and among those who sympathize with them.

Mark is quite aware that such a strategy would trigger severe economic and social upheaval. As he writes, “If conservatives were in fact supporting the mass roundup and deportation of 11–12 million people, losing the Hispanic vote would be the least of our problems.”He is quite correct. Mass removal of illegals would require, by definition, the termination of 7 million labor agreements between employers and employees. It would throw 6.6 million families containing 14 million individuals into crisis — families that include 4.9 million children and 3.5 million American citizens. It would bankrupt entire rural export industries, and throw hospitality-based urban development into havoc. But Mark wants conservatives to remain blissfully unaware of the revolutionary nature of mass removal. New work-based computer software, he says, will handle everything cleanly. Let’s call it Krikorian 2.0.

Restrictionist LIE #3: Hispanic voting patterns are unaffected by the immigration debate.

. Tom Tancredo makes the bizarre point that the GOP’s share of the Hispanic vote are well within the historical “range.” Kirkorian also continues to downplay the loss of Latino votes and unrelated to the restrictionist activities, calling anyone who refers to the loss as "hawkish immigration views."

. Fact: Between 2004 and 2008, the Pew Hispanic Center found that the percentage of Latinos who believe that the Democratic party “has more concern for Hispanics” than the Republicans rose by 14 percentage points — a total virtually identical to the shift in Latino voter patterns recorded in the Edison-Mitofsky exit polls. Hispanics who are themselves citizens, and whose views on immigration policy are similar to those of other Americans, oppose “enforcement only” candidates because they fear that those candidates’ policies will personally affect them, or a friend, or a family member. In other words, the prospect of mass deportation balkanizes them.

Restrictionist LIE #4: Mass removal of illegals will improve the economy.

. Restrictionists assume demonizing illegal seasonal and low-wage labor — and the employers who employ that labor — Republicans will win the support of working-class Democrats. Mark Krikorian advances the new-age theory that low-wage and “low-skill” work is economically counterproductive in advanced industrial societies.

. Economists and businessmen believe no such thing. The entire white-collar structure of management, distribution, and sales in major export industries such as grain production, cattle ranching, meat processing, orchard horticulture, fisheries, and forestry is dependent on the availability of such labor in the United States.

Restrictionist LIE #5: Renunciation of mass deportation implies a renunciation of conservative principles generally.

. Mass Deportation is NOT a Conservative principle. It is morally detestable, economically insane, and politically suicidal.

. If the Republican party embraces mass deportation, the family disruption involved in that policy’s execution will irremediably tarnish the party’s pro-family image.

. If the Republican party embraces the economics of restricting low-cost and seasonal labor, the ranks of the unemployed will swell by the millions — and the unemployed, needless to say, vote for left-wing Democrats far more consistently than immigrants do.

. If the Republican party refuses to negotiate guest-worker measures simultaneously with border-security measures, it will obstruct needed border reforms imperative to crime control and national security.

In short, mass deportation, an option unthinkable in conservative circles a mere four years ago, undermines every tenet, and every goal, of the conservative agenda.

Obama's Make Sense Immigration Policies: Target and Deport Felonious Criminals

Finally!! We have a President with "make-sense" Immigration Policies. It is time we IDENTIFY and DEPORT Felonious Criminals, STOP Racial Profiling and 287(g) programs and leave the workers alone until CIR.

The DC Examiner Reports:

New program in place to ID, deport illegals:
Immigration enforcers began a new program in Fairfax County to identify and deport illegal aliens with major criminal pasts.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs department is electronically checking the immigration records of every detainee in the Fairfax jail. ICE will determine the individual’s immigration status and deport offenders with major drug offenses and violent offenses such as murder, rape, robbery and kidnapping.

Fairfax County is the first in the Washington area and the first in Virginia to use the program.

U.S. Immigration Policies: Broken Policies / Broken Promises!

The U.S. Immigration Policies are hopelessly BROKEN! 40% of the 12M here are due to Visa overstays and many of these cases are PENDING in the backlogged and very broken Immigration court process.

Most Americans are ignorant of the fact that these processes are so broken and backlogged.

Here is a peek at what is happening in one city, in one state where the overburdened legal process is shattering at the seams:

The Houston Chronicle reports:

Cases flood immigration courts in Houston
Despite rise in cases, number of judges has changed little

In a cramped hallway in Houston’s immigration court building, a toddler dressed in his pajamas slept soundly, sprawled out on a Spiderman blanket on his father’s lap. The wooden benches in a nearby courtroom were full, leaving a half-dozen immigrants and their attorneys to stand in the aisle.As the hours ticked by, an elderly woman facing deportation to Mexico rested her head in her hands. It was more than three hours before the court called her case — one of more than 30 on a judge’s calendar on a recent morning.
The scene is typical for Houston’s immigration courts, which saw a roughly 40 percent increase in case load from 2002 to 2007. The situation here is part of a nationwide problem, critics say. Nationally, the number of immigration prosecutions has increased significantly in recent years. Immigration judges received more than 334,000 matters — including bonds, motions and removal proceedings — in 2007, up from roughly 290,000 in 2002. Meanwhile, the number of immigration judges has remained flat, with 224 today compared with 225 in 2002. Since 2002, the federal government has added one immigration judge in Texas, for a total of 23.

The federal government has acknowledged for years the need to employ more immigration judges, but the agency that handles the hiring, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, has struggled with bureaucracy and budget constraints. David Burnham, who has studied the immigration court system extensively as co-director of theTransactional Records Access Clearinghouse with Syracuse University, described EOIR as “an agency adrift” during the past few years. But the blame shouldn’t stop there, or with the prior administration, he said, adding that Congress hasn’t “stepped up to bat.”

In 2006, then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales pledged to revamp the system, with the hiring of judges listed as a top priority. But last year, key members of Gonzales’ staff came under scrutiny amid reports they considered judicial candidates’ politics — rather than qualifications — in deciding appointments. The effort to find and appoint conservative and party-loyalist judges at times threatened to clog courts and delayed deportations, according to a Justice Department investigation.

In August 2007, the EOIR instituted a new screening and hiring policy for immigration judges designed to address concerns raised by the reports. EOIR spokeswoman Elaine Komis said the agency “continues to fill immigration judge vacancies as quickly as possible.”EOIR has 24 judge vacancies and is in various stages of the selection process for most of those positions, she said. Komis said EOIR is hoping Congress will designate $5 million for the hiring of immigration judges as part of the 2009 budget, which is still awaiting approval.

BROKEN IMMIGRATION PROCESSES:

The average judge in an immigration court hears about 1,200 removal proceedings every year, compared with an average annual case load of 480 for district judges, according to the Brookings Institution, a research organization in Washington, D.C. And whereas district court judges generally have two to three law clerks to assist them, immigration judges have one clerk for every six judges, Marks said.

Brittney Nystrom, senior legal adviser for the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for comprehensive immigration reform, said the case-to-judge ratio is particularly troubling. “It raises a lot of concerns for all of the players in the system,” Nystrom said. “The immigration judges themselves are concerned that they don’t have the resources or the time to adequately adjudicate their cases. The immigrants and the immigrant representatives are concerned they don’t have time to present their cases.”
Some local immigration attorneys said the manpower shortage is of particular concern in Houston’s two immigration courts, which in fiscal year 2007 received about 12,500 immigration matters. That’s up from 8,900 five years earlier. In the court, judges routinely have 30 to 40 matters scheduled in a single morning. Many cases are postponed — some for three to six months at a time — to give attorneys more time to prepare for court or to give petitioners additional time to hear back from immigration officials on pending applications.
Impact on due process
Raed Gonzalez, a Houston immigration attorney, said the high volume of cases has an adverse impact on clients’ due process. In some instances, the court refuses to wait for U.S. immigration officials to approve or deny a petition for legal permanent residency, which can take months to process. “There are many people who are entitled to relief and the judges will not wait for them,” he said, adding that the judges are under pressure to clear cases quickly. The court delays can affect clients’ personal lives, he said.
One client from Pakistan has been waiting five years for his case to be resolved in immigration court, Gonzalez said, adding that it has put stress on the man’s marriage.

Immigration Hero Profile: Juan Garcia - Community Organizer

Immigration Hero Profile

Who: Juan Garcia

Where: Rhode Island

Role: Community Organizer for the Immigrants in Action Committee.

Supports: Immigrants, Legal or Illegal, with Immigration Issues. Educates recent immigrants on everyday concerns. Public Speaker (Radio, Local Television, Meetings, Rallies, etc). The go-to person for immigrants unwilling to work with police or state agencies for fear they or someone they love could be deported.

Opposes: R.I. Governor Carcieri's March 2008 order. The order requires state police and prison officials to identify illegal immigrants for deportation and mandates state agencies and contractors use a federal database to validate employees' legal status.

Why: the order is confusing and has led to racial profiling. He believes illegal immigration should be treated as a civil — not criminal — violation.

Example of Racial Profiling in R.I.: Jose Genao and a friend were speaking in Spanish as they waited at a plumbing supply store last March. Owner David Richardson asked them to produce social security numbers to show they were legal residents. Genao, a U.S. citizen who speaks fluent English, knew he was wronged but didn't know how to respond. He went to Garcia who helped him file a compliant with state and local civil agencies. Garcia drew publicity to the case. The courts found Richardson broke city and state discrimination laws. Richardson apologized and gave $500 to Genao, who gave five $100 payments to the organizations that helped him, including Garcia's.

Background: Juan Garcia's activism dates to his childhood. As a 10-year-old child and other children threw rocks at Guatemalan troops storming into their village to kill students during the country's long civil war. Garcia came to the United States in 1977, in the trunk of a car, to escape a bloody civil war in his home country. He arrived "without documents, without anything," he said — and settled in San Antonio, where he married a Mexican-American woman and raised two children. He began thinking about American immigration policy after his father died in Guatemala in 1988. He was concerned he'd be unable to return to the United States a second time if he went to his father's bedside, an experience that inspired him to make it easier for workers to emigrate to America. He's now a permanent, legal resident and lives in Rhode Island with his brothers and found work welding in Pawtucket.

Garcia regained his Faith and a renewed sense of activitism after a brutal assault. In 1992, attackers stabbed him a dozen times, nearly killing him, during a robbery. "I felt I hated the people who did this," he said. "I didn't want to feel hatred against anyone." Searching for peace, he wandered into St. Teresa of Avila, a Catholic church near his Providence home. He began going regularly, and started working in 1998 with Immigrants in Action, which is housed in the church.

Juan Garcia relishes his role as an activist and adviser for new immigrants and is very empathetic to their needs since he once walked in their shoes. However, he knows the limits of what one person can do. "Every day it's the same," he said. "People think I have a magic wand, that I can resolve everything. But no." Try as he might, even he cannot resolve the broken Immigration process. He strongly supports Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

References:

R.I. immigrant leader is go-to man for new arrivals

Clergy decries Carcieri’s order on immigrants

Economy, Earmarks & Recovery: Republicans and Wall Street Busy Demonizing President Obama Instead of Accepting Responsibilitiy & Supporting Solutions!

Republicans are hypocrites! They are complaining about earmarks in the Stimulus Package yet Republicans top the list with the largest earmarks and are responsible for nearly 50% of them.

From US News: Republican Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi tops the list, with $470 million in earmarks for himself and his colleagues. Next up is Cochran's seatmate—Republican Roger Wicker, hitting the scales at $390 million. Two Democrats—Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Tom Harkin of Iowa—come in at Nos. 3 and 4, before Republican David Vitter of Louisiana rounds out the top five. Of the top 10, six are Republicans. When measured by individual earmarking, Democrat Bob Byrd of West Virginia rises to the No. 1 position, but three in the top five are from the GOP, including Richard Shelby of Alabama at No. 2, just a few million dollars behind Byrd. Additionally Rep. Ron Paul, R-Lake Jackson: 22 earmarks totaling $96.1 million

Republicans are continuing to try to sweep their history of irresponsibility, especially the last eight years, under the rug and convince the American people that they are committed to fiscal responsibility, but their record on earmarks and the amount of earmarks contained in the appropriations bill make it clear that Republicans are just using this as another political ploy.

What Republicans won't admit is, most earmarks are justified. Anti-government types always single out one or two examples of outrageous earmark spending as if it represents ALL earmark spending. These Congress people are there to represent their districts and states to the federal government. This often means fighting for EARMARKS = federal dollars coming back to their districts in the form of projects that hire people, keep them in a job or build something that will benefit the community through things like tourism.

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

In the meantime, the yahoos on Wall Street are also attempting to blame President Obama for the mess Wall Street made themselves!

Robert Reich blogs:

Is Obama responsible for the meltdown of the Dow? The consistently wrong-headed Wall Street Journal's editorial page says so, as does Republican Fox News, CNN's reliably demagogic Lou Dobbs, and now CNBC's Jim Cramer, who bloviates nightly about stock picks, says Obama is pushing a "radical agenda" that's destroying investor's wealth. My friend Larry Kudlow, who rants nightly about nearly everything, says Obama is destroying capitalism. CNBC reporter Rick Santelli's ballistic nonsense about Obama's mortgage plan made him a pop-populist icon for a week or so.The argument that Obama is somehow responsible for the collapse of Wall Street is absurd.

First, every major policy that led to this collapse occurred under George W's watch (or, more accurately, his failure to watch). The housing and financial bubbles were created under Bush and exploded under Bush. The stock market began to collapse under Bush.

Second, it's inevitable that stocks, led by the bloated financial sector, would lose their remaining hot air as the new administration begins "stress-testing" the big banks, many of which are technically insolvent. After all, their share prices were built on a tissue of lies and dreams. Other sectors whose values were similarly distorted and distended by years of financial deception and regulatory disregard, such as housing and insurance, will also have to return to the real world before they can recover. Which could mean more stock losses.

Finally, none of the financial wizards who are now charging Obama with leading America into the abyss has offered an alternative plan for getting us out of the mess that, not incidentally, many of these same wizards happily led us into. For years, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the financial gurus of cable news cheered as Wall Street leveraged its way into oblivion. This bizarre charge wouldn't be worth mentioning were it not a market test for a more intense attack from Wall Street and Republican media outlets next year as the nation moves into the gravitational range of the 2010 midterm elections. Republicans have made no secret of their wish to blame Obama for the bad economy, and to stir up as much populist rage against his so-called "socialist" tendencies as politically possible. History shows how effective demagogic ravings can be when a public is stressed economically. Make no mistake: Angry right-wing populism lurks just below the surface of the terrible American economy, ready to be launched not only at Obama but also at liberals, intellectuals, gays, blacks, Jews, the mainstream media, coastal elites, crypto socialists, and any other potential target of paranoid opportunity.

Robert is right! We are already seeing many of the ANTI websites and Dobbs, Hannity, Beck and Limbaugh blaming "illeeeeegals" for many of our country's economic woes! It is important that all of us keep this in mind the next time we hear the Republicans, cable news zealots or Wall Street pushing blame for our economic crisis on Obama or on any of us when instead they should be pointing the finger right back at themselves. Additionally, they are demonizing the Stimulus Bill and Obama's policies preferring Obama and our country FAIL! We cannot be tempted to jump on their bandwagon and instead remember who caused this mess and we have to allow our President and the Administration time to help us move forward. Afterall, it took over a decade for our country to get out of the last Great Depression. We should at least allow our President until 2010 before we see significant progress.