« February 2008 | Main | April 2008 »

It's over: John McCain is our new president. I'm going on a holiday.

In a way, the news that John McCain is our new president is a bit of a relief. I'm not happy about it, but on the other hand it was getting just too nerve-wracking for a moment there, and now I can go on a nice holiday.

Posted to WackyHumor at 10:31 PM

Barack Obama wants national holiday for Cesar Chavez

In an absurdly obvious attempt at pandering, Barack Obama wants to make Cesar Chavez' birthday a national holiday (barackobama.com/2008/03/31/obama_calls_for_national_holid.php):

...As farmworkers and laborers across America continue to struggle for fair treatment and fair wages, we find strength in what Cesar Chavez accomplished so many years ago...

Just one problem: unlike Barack Obama, Chavez opposed illegal immigration. In fact, he even called the INS on illegal aliens. If Obama were truly interested in "fair treatment and fair wages", he'd work to reduce illegal immigration. Instead, in the unlikely event he were elected president, just like Bush he'd work to keep the cheap labor flowing.

The bill to make Chavez' birthday a national holiday is being pushed by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, including Rep. Joe Baca. Eight states celebrate the "Cesar Chavez Day of Service and Learning", which probably doesn't feaure his opposition to illegal immigration. Asking Obama about the conflicts between his and Chavez' positions on illegal activity would make an interesting conversation starter and Youtube video.

Posted to Politics at 10:14 PM

SPLC's "The Year in Hate" misled about FBI hate crime statistics

Earlier this month the Southern Poverty Law Center - a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government - released a report entitled "The Year in Hate", which continued their attempt to shut down debate about immigration matters. Per the AP:

The law center's report contends there is a link between anti-immigrant activism and the significant rise in hate crimes against Latinos in recent years. According to the latest FBI statistics, 819 people were victimized by anti-Latino hate crimes in 2006, compared with 595 in 2003.

However, on the same day as the SPLC's report was issued, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) offered this press release:

When examined responsibly, the FBI hate crime data show a dramatically different story than the one the SPLC portrays. First, in order to suggest an artificially large increase in the raw number of hate crimes, the SPLC selects 2003 as its base year, one of lowest years on record for hate crimes against Hispanics. If one compares the number of hate crimes between 1995 (the earliest report available on the FBI's website) and 2006 (the most recent statistical year available), one would see that the number of hate crimes has increased only 17 percent... But even this is not the whole story. The SPLC conveniently forgets to index the raw hate crime data with the population, a step always taken by the FBI to more accurately depict an increase or decrease in crime. Thus, when one indexes a 17 percent increase in hate crimes against Hispanics with a 67 percent increase in the Hispanic population between 1995 and 2006, it becomes clear that the rate of hate crimes against Hispanics has in fact dropped dramatically -- by about 40 percent.

Charting the numbers over time - bearing in mind to compare apples with apples - is left as an exercise, but I'm willing to take FAIR's word for it.

Now, here's a partial list of those who've spread the SPLC's misinformation:

* Bill Richardson, in his endorsement of Barack Obama ("I have been troubled by the demonization of immigrants--specifically Hispanics-- by too many in this country. Hate crimes against Hispanics are rising as a direct result...", link)

* The Associated Press' David Crary ("Hate Crimes Linked to Immigration Debate", 3/9, link)

* Casey Woods of the Miami Herald ("Anti-illegal immigration groups grow in Florida", 3/31, link)

* Bruce Tomaso of the Dallas Morning News offers "Study finds hate groups on the rise, fueled by anti-immigrant sentiments" (link), but provides this commendable note: "A word of caution: The Southern Poverty Law Center has done courageous, important work over the years, but... [t]he center is sometimes accused of inflating the numbers in its studies of hate groups and hate crimes... to justify its own fight against those forces."

* An unknown writer from the publicly-funded VOA News offers "Report Links Anti-Immigrant Sentiment in the US to Rise in Hate Groups" (link)

* ThinkProgress (3/10, link)

* Deborah Bulkeley/Deseret Morning News ("Utah groups listed in racist-hate report", 3/11, link)

* WITN ("Study: 28 Hate Groups In NC, Including Greenville", 3/10, link)

* DiversityInc Magazine ("Hate Groups in America Surging: New Southern Poverty Law Center Report", 3/10, link)

* Bob Lowry/Huntsville Times ("Number of hate groups increases", 3/11, link, admits that their claims were based on "incomplete FBI statistics")

* Jayme West/KTAR ("Report: Hate Groups Growing in Arizona", 3/18, link)

* Scott Michels of ABC News ("Hate Crimes Tied to Immigration Debate?", 3/10, link)

* Mark Bullock/WSFA ("SPLC Report: Immigration Debate Fueling Hate Groups", 3/28, link)

* Sam Wood/Philadelphia Inquirer ("Study says number of U.S. hate groups rose", 3/11, link)

* Unrelated to the current SPLC report, on 12/5/07, Amy Goodman hosted Mark Potok of the SPLC (link). Apparently based on preparation he'd given her, she made the now-familiar claim: "New FBI statistics suggest anti-Latino hate crimes have risen by almost 35% since 2003.". Potok also noted that, "Well, basically, it's an anecdotal report. The FBI statistics, like all hate crimes statistics, are extremely shaky. But the direction that things are going in is obvious."

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:46 PM

Let's blame John McCain on Ann Althouse (bloggers helped McCain?)

Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times offers "Blogger outreach boosts McCain" (link), an uncharacteristic attempt to blame the resurgence of John McCain on bloggers rather than where it mostly belongs: on constant MSM puffery:

Even as talk radio was brutalizing Sen. John McCain in the Republican presidential primaries, conservative bloggers reached a respectful truce with the Arizona senator over touchy issues and gave him what the campaign called a "tremendous positive psychological" boost.

The main reason: Mr. McCain's blogger outreach, the most extensive of any presidential campaign in either party, helped keep him afloat in the dark days last summer when the major press was sizing up his campaign grave. During those times, Mr. McCain got attention and digital ink from the bloggers he invited to biweekly conference calls, and got a chance to talk policy.

McCain's resurgence was more likely due to the MSM, which did things like smear his opponents and those who support our laws (for instance, from Joel Achenbach) or which lied about his immigration stance (examples from Bennett Roth, Elisabeth Bumiller and John Broder, and Ron Claiborne and Peter Canellos).

However, that doesn't leave hack bloggers who participated in those conference calls off the hook, who completely failed to ask McCain anything approaching a real question. Those bloggers include Ann Althouse, someone who's constantly promoted by Instapundit despite having little to say. After a couple of her reports of conference calls I left comments with suggested questions and instead, if she asked a question at all it was extremely lightweight. I continue to be amazed that she's an actual law professor.

Others include "Captain Ed" Morrissey. Despite asking a better question recently, every other question that I'm aware of him having asked politicians in the past is something that even Politburo hacks would consider too obsequious. Others apparently taking part in the conference calls were Jim Geraghty from the National Review, PowerLine, one or more people from Townhall, one or more from race42008.com, and Robert Bluey of the Heritage Foundation and affiliated in some way with RedState.

Posted to Bloggage at 10:53 AM

GPO outsourced "secure" passports to foreign countries; Chinese espionage

From the first of a three part series on this issue:

The United States has outsourced the manufacturing of its electronic passports to overseas companies — including one in Thailand that was victimized by Chinese espionage — raising concerns that cost savings are being put ahead of national security, an investigation by The Washington Times has found.

The Government Printing Office's decision to export the work has proved lucrative, allowing the agency to book more than $100 million in recent profits by charging the State Department more money for blank passports than it actually costs to make them, according to interviews with federal officials and documents obtained by The Times.

Needless to say, the GPO, the DHS, and the State Department are following the usual protocol by claiming there were no risks. They also say they had no choice because the foreign chips were the only ones that met their standards. However:

...GPO Inspector General J. Anthony Ogden, the agency's internal watchdog, doesn't share that confidence. He warned in an internal Oct. 12 report that there are "significant deficiencies with the manufacturing of blank passports, security of components, and the internal controls for the process."

Note also that unsecured FedEx shipments were used for some of the "secure" passports (link).

Posted to Immigration_terror at 02:22 PM

The Evening Bleeding Knees Report for Saturday, March 29 2008

INCIDENTS

Location: above Pasadena
Update on latest bleeding knees instance

Subject was mountain biking down trail, apparently feeling good about self. Went through section with loose rocks, got out of control. Fell. Somewhere between involuntary dismount and full-on crash. Almost went headfirst into rocky ground, snapping off helmet visor in process. Incident occured somewhere above 2 mile marker.

Points of impact/sources of flowing blood:
Front of left knee (no deep cuts, but will have restricted movement/bruising)
Palm of left hand
Inside of right knee
Outside of right forearm
Bridge of nose

Posted to OutdoorSports at 08:45 PM

Dolores Huerta says we can't enforce immigration laws, promotes demographic hegemony (ask Hillary Clinton)

United Farm Workers of America co-founder Dolores Huerta - also a co-chair of the Hillary Clinton campaign (link) - gave a speech straight out of the Balkans (or other places) on Thursday at San Bernardino Valley College in Southern California (link).

It'd be great if someone somewhere could go to a Hillary Clinton appearance and ask her to denounce the following statements. I'm not expecting anyone to do that, but it'd be great if someone could prove me wrong.

"We didn't cross the border," the revered immigrant and farm worker advocate told an enthusiastic crowd of mostly college students. "The border crossed us."

...In her wide-ranging speech, which was sponsored by Arts and Lecture Series Committee and MECHA Latino faculty and staff, Huerta railed against anti-immigrant groups, the North American Free Trade Agreement, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed state budget cuts to education, and U.S. government inaction on immigration reform.

...She said illegal workers were a critical bulwark of the national economy, yet were faced with virulent anti-illegal-immigrant groups such as the Minuteman Project that she said were "linked" to the United States government.

She said Immigration and Customs Enforcement crackdowns had deported 290,000 people to Latin American countries in what she characterized as an "ethnic cleansing."

But anti-illegal-immigration efforts were doomed to failure, Huerta said, as illegal immigrants and naturalized Latinos had gained a foothold in the country.

"It's really too late," Huerta said of anti-illegal-immigration movements. "If 47 million (Latinos) have one baby each ... it's already won."

...Huerta's reception at the community college was overwhelmingly positive.

..."I liked how she said 75 percent of the world was people of color," said SBVC student Randy Dale, 23. "We are the majority, and we should be in charge more, especially in the U.S."

Related:
100+ Hispanic groups send letter supporting illegal immigration, opposing raids
Watanabe, Gorman on "Unity Blueprint for Immigration Reform" (massive amnesty, questionable links)
Democrats' fave Mexican congressmen support Elvira Arellano; Dolores Huerta; commission?
Darrell Issa, PFAW, Huerta, Catholic leaders, immigration town hall meetings
AZ Daily Star regrets hate speech headline

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:53 PM

10% of entire prison population are immigrants eligible for deportation

According to Julie Myers, head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"), around 10% of the total U.S. prison population are immigrants who could be deported (link). In order to avoid confusion (see the David Leonhardt/New York Times smear of Lou Dobbs), it's important to note that that doesn't just include federal prisons but all prisons and jails at the federal, state and local level. And, it also includes persons in various immigration statuses who are eligible for deportation, not just those who were illegal aliens at the time of committing the crime.

Myers presented her plans to work to deport those criminals to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, and estimated that the cost could be over $2 billion per year. Her plan involves information sharing between various agencies.

Both Reps. David Price (D-NC) and Harold Rogers (R-KY) seem to support deporting the criminals, with the former raising questions about the efficacy of her plan and the latter saying just that the plan needs work. The fact that a Democrat is raising questions raises questions of its own, but on the other hand the plan is coming from Myers so there probably are some issues with it.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:31 PM

House of Lords: immigration to Britain has had nearly zero economic benefit

From this:

Ten years of record immigration to Britain has produced virtually no economic benefits for the country, a parliamentary inquiry has found.

A House of Lords committee, which is due to report next Tuesday, will call into question Government claims that foreign workers add £6 billion each year to the wealth of the nation.

It is expected to say this must be balanced against the increase in population and their use of local services such as health and education, resulting in little benefit per head of the population.

"Our overall conclusion is that the economic benefits of net immigration to the resident population are small and close to zero in the long run," the report will say.

The findings of the Lords economics committee threaten to demolish the key argument made by ministers to justify the highest levels of immigration in the country's history...

Posted to Immigration_euro at 11:32 AM

Treasury Dep't proposes consolidating Federal Reserve's power

I don't follow financial matters, but I know instinctively that this has to be a bad idea:

The Treasury Department will propose on Monday that Congress give the Federal Reserve broad new authority to oversee financial market stability, in effect allowing it to send SWAT teams into any corner of the industry or any institution that might pose a risk to the overall system.

...According to a summary provided by the administration, the plan would consolidate what is now an alphabet soup of banking and securities regulators into a powerful trio of overseers responsible for everything from banks and brokerage firms to hedge funds and private equity firms.

While the plan could expose Wall Street investment banks and hedge funds to greater scrutiny, it carefully avoids a call for tighter regulation.

The plan would not rein in practices that have been linked to the housing and mortgage crisis, like packaging risky subprime mortgages into securities carrying the highest ratings.

Posted to Miscellania at 07:09 PM

Secret tape of Arianna Huffington

Arianna Huffington... exposed! Apparently someone snuck a secret camera into her hotel room, and you can see a shocking peek at her life here.

(Yes, I hate promoting something like this and I wish it was so mean that Huffington herself wasn't promoting it and possibly due to some sort of business arrangement. However, it all fits together since yesterday I intentionally drove behind a bus just so I could stare at Tracey Ullman's tongue.)

Posted to WackyHumor at 04:42 PM

A Dream Deferred: Robert Greenwald/Brave New Films supports anti-American DREAM Act

Earlier I noted that Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films was going to start producing immigration documentaries. Their first is a video (link) and site (adreamdeferred.org) supporting the DREAM Act, one of the most anti-American pieces of legislation ever devised. It would let illegal aliens take college discounts and slot from U.S. citizens (illustrated here), thereby giving those foreign citizens a better break than our own citizens and devaluing what citizenship means. As such, it's a direct attack on the entire concept of U.S. citizenship.

The video is oddly titled "A Dream Deferred....does it explode?" I don't know exactly what they mean, but I would have thought threats of physical violence below even them. Yet, I have no interpretation other than that title being a threat of some form of civil disturbance.

The video consists basically of baby-waving and doesn't present any logical argument. It also features California state senator Gil Cedillo, someone whose actions are frequently indistinguishable from those of an actual paid agent of the Mexican government.

The posts at adreamdeferred.org accept comments if you want to let them know what you think. Other than that, I suggest working to discredit those others who promote the site.

UPDATE: Oops! Leighton Woodhouse from the Brave New Foundation posts "Let's Put College in Reach for Hardworking Immigrant Students (VIDEO)" (alternet.org/rights/80643) and gets a more than frosty reception from fellow liberals.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:53 PM

Doug Feaver will make you "hate" the Washington Post all over again (N.C. Aizenman)

Doug Feaver runs the Washington Post blog "dot.comments", which appears to consist of attacks against their readers who leave comments rather than attempts to engage those readers' concerns. Yesterday he offered "The Latino Emigration" (link), a passive-aggressive attempt to smear those who, unlike the WaPo, oppose illegal activity:

No subject -- not presidential politics, not the war in Iraq -- generates more hate-filled comments from some of our readers than illegal immigration. Today, N.C. Aizenman reports that a "vibrant Latino subculture" in Prince William County, Va., is coming unglued because of "the construction downturn, the mortgage crisis and new local laws aimed at catching illegal immigrants." ...This subject is not going away and requires a significantly more civilized national discussion than this emotional issue is getting now.

I don't see any "hate" in the comments he quotes, but I didn't review all the comments left on the article. This is yet another example of the MSM being called on their propaganda and then blaming those who point it out.

And, the N.C. Aizenman story (link) is indeed propaganda similar to other "ghost town" stories, such as those from Russ Bynum/AP, Jill Capuzzo/NYT, and another one from the AP. Some highlights:

"If things keep going this way, I don't know how I'm going to survive," said [a restaurant owner whose clientele was apparently largely illegal aliens], massaging a sore arm her doctor blames on stress... As [a choir leader] watched them take their places beside her, she said afterward, she thought sadly of those not there: Brother William, the young Salvadoran carpet layer with a knack for guitar playing, who used to keep them all in tune [etc.]... The sun gleamed over Manassas out of a cloudless sky... But those neighbors are gone now, their homes vacant like so many others in the subdivision. And Silda, who is in the United States illegally, is too nervous to venture out for casual strolls... the Bangladesh-born owner [of a 99 cents store], perked up at the rare sight of a shopper... As [someone who fell on hard times and as a result fell out of Temporary Protected Status] lit his candle, it illuminated a large, framed photograph of him and his wife embracing the children. Mauricio stood for a moment, looking up at their grinning faces, before walking out of the room.

I have to wonder: do the WaPo's "reporters" ever break out laughing as they write these things? Does the WaPo hire people who used to write romance novels or the like? Does the WaPo have any shame?

UPDATE: Note to the WaPo: "Bart's People" (link) was comedy, not a model for you to follow.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:44 PM

Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) endorses Barack Obama; a flashback

Senator Bob Casey, Democrat from Pennsylvania, has endorsed Barack Obama and will go on tour with him.

Per an Obama flack:

"There are few stronger advocates for working families in Pennsylvania than Sen. Casey."

Yes indeed, and it doesn't matter whether they're U.S. citizens or citizens of foreign countries who are here illegally, Senator Casey is on their side. It's time for a flashback to a year and a half ago, when he was running against Rick Santorum:

Posted to Politics at 11:35 AM

McCain campaign dodges Juan Hernandez question; denies Heath Shuler charge

Speaking on a conference call today, Steve Schmidt and Jill Hazelbaker of the John McCain campaign denied the recent claim (link) from Rep. Heath Shuler that McCain had strong-armed other Republicans from signing on to his SAVE Act.

Then, from our "at least it was asked" file comes the news that Ed Morrissey (link) and John Hawkins (link) inquired about McCain's Hispanic outreach director, Juan Hernandez - a former cabinet-level official with the Mexican government. From the Hawkins summary:

Q: Will McCain be getting rid of Juan Hernandez?

A: McCain says we should secure the border first and go after employers. Then, he wants to have a path to citizenship. Juan Hernandez will support McCain's positions.

Follow-up question: Isn't having Hernandez on staff the equivalent of having McPeak onboard with Obama? Doesn't it cast doubt on his commitment if he has him on staff?

A: John McCain is crystal clear on the issue and his position is his own, not Juan Hernandez's.

An apparent transcription of part of that is here:

"Any person who supports John McCain's campaigns is a subscriber to John McCain's views and even if those people have published things or said things in terms of policy that are contrary to John McCain’s policies that does not mean John McCain supports that person's view. That person is working in a campaign to help express John McCain’s view."

A better question might involve something like how they expect anyone to believe that someone who's no doubt pledged an oath to the Mexican government to be able to support McCain's position. Unless, there's little difference between McCain's position and that of the Mexican government.

Someone who wants to do a great service could go undercover to Hernandez' appearances and catch him saying something "interesting" as part of his outreach, and then use that to show what McCain really supports.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:08 AM

Owen Gleiberman/Entertainment Weekly's movie review forgot something important

Owen Gleiberman - movie critic for Entertainment Weekly - offers a review of the new film "Under the Same Moon", a tearjerker designed to make illegal immigration acceptable.

Unfortunately, Glieberman forgot to tell his readers that the movie was financed by the Mexican government. The same government that profits from illegal immigration is now financing a movie designed to support illegal immigration.

Not only that, but the last few words of his review - and similar quotes sniping at Lou Dobbs - is now being used in their ad:

Under the Same Moon's politics sneak up on you. The film says that the U.S. immigrant situation is untenable, but then it forces us to ask: What should be done? That's a good enough "argument" to find in a movie with an ending so touching it could make Lou Dobbs cry.

I've contacted EW, and hopefully they'll update his review to point out that the movie is propaganda financed by a foreign government.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 02:04 PM

Seven reasons Kos (DailyKos) can't be trusted on immigration (+Quinnipiac University poll)

Can you trust Kos of DailyKos (Markos Moulitsas Zuniga) on immigration? No, you can't. For some of the reasons why, take a look at "The big immigration backlash in Connecticut" (dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/27/113830/115).

1. He fails to note that, before working for the city of New Haven, Kica Matos headed a group that is/was working with the Mexican government to pass out Matricula Consular cards in that city. As with New Haven's cards, the MC cards let illegal aliens open bank accounts and the like. The bottom line in this case is the bottom line: that makes it easier for illegal aliens to send money home to Mexico and also allows banks to profit from money that was earned illegally.

2. He fails to note that the mayor of New Haven, John DeStefano, may have a financial interest in a local bank that would accept the New Haven ID cards.

3. The timing of the raid was certainly interesting and warrants more research. However, per the DHS (see the following NYT article), the planning had started months before the raid.

4. Kos fails to note that the New York Times article he links to ("Arrests of 31 in U.S. Sweep Bring Fear in New Haven" by Jennifer Medina, link) is heavily biased; the photo from that article was featured here.

5. The upper levels of the DHS may have intended there to be a "backlash". As with Kos, the Bush administration is a strong supporter of illegal immigration and Chertoff has hinted at conducting show raids in order to inflame the left and push for an amnesty. Kos doesn't mention that possibility.

6. Kos fails to recognize huge problems with a recent Quinnipiac University poll in Connecticut (link), which asked:

What do you think should happen to most illegal immigrants working in the United States - Should they be offered a chance to apply for citizenship, OR Should they be allowed to stay as temporary workers, OR Should they be deported to the country they came from?

There are several problems with that question. For instance, it leaves off another option of simply enforcing our laws and causing illegal aliens to self-deport. The first choice is also extremely ambiguous: when should they be offered that chance? While they're living here? After they return home for a while (see the Pence and similar schemes)? After having returned to their home countries voluntarily but not as part of a particular amnesty scheme? And, the poll also fails to note all the ramifications of the various options, such as the role the first two would play in leading to more illegal immigration.

7. Kos says "The vast majority of the public isn't interested in what Lou Dobbs, Fox News, the federal government, and Rahm Emanuel are selling." Obviously, he's extremely confused. During the big push for amnesty - the one that was blocked by the American public - Fox News was largely silent. Lou Dobbs seems to support some form of attrition rather than the mass deportations possibly (once again, it's ambiguous) implied by the last poll choice. And, of course, the Bush administration is as much a strong supporter of illegal immigration as Kos. I guess that's so difficult for him to admit that he has to lie.

BONUS REASON #8: The poll refers to "illegal immigrants working in the United States", but that certainly doesn't include all illegal aliens. Perhaps millions of illegal aliens are non-working children, spouses, or other family members, with some percentage being unemployed and some other percentage being career criminals and the like. All or most of those would have been amnestied by various past immigration "reform" schemes. Needless to say, Kos doesn't call Quinnipiac on yet another issue with their poll.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:33 PM

Arnold Schwarzenegger: don't blame illegal aliens for California budget woes

Continuing his descent into becoming a PC Democratic clown, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was asked today what he wants to do about the costs of illegal immigration on the state. He said blaming illegal aliens would be a "big mistake". How about we blame illegal immigration supporters - or passive enablers like Arnold himself - for their actions, which have indeed played a role in the state's financial difficulties? Unfortunately, whatever the original question was it wasn't subtle enough, enabling Arnie to basically engage in lawyerly obfuscation:

"There is, you know, always a time like this where you start pointing the finger at various different elements of what creates the budget mess, and, you know, some may point the finger at illegal immigrants... I can guarantee you, I have been now four years in office in Sacramento, I don't think that illegal immigration has created the mess that we are in."

It certainly hasn't "created" it, but it has played a role. And, if Arnie had fought those who support illegal activity - such as Fabian Nunez - instead of collaborating with them, he could have had an impact on both reducing illegal immigration and also with cleaning up Sacramento in relation to other matters.

Posted to California at 08:01 PM

Iraq paid for Jim McDermott/David Bonior/Mike Thompson trip?

Back in October 2002, Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA), David Bonior (D-MI) and Mike Thompson (D-CA) - all, of course, Democrats - took a trip to Iraq:

The three anti-war Democrats made the trip in October 2002, while the Bush administration was trying to persuade Congress to authorize military action against Iraq. While traveling, they called for a diplomatic solution.

Prosecutors say that trip was arranged by Muthanna Al-Hanooti, a Michigan charity official, who was charged Wednesday with setting up the junket at the behest of Saddam's regime. Iraqi intelligence officials allegedly paid for the trip through an intermediary and rewarded Al-Hanooti with 2 million barrels of Iraqi oil.

Back in 2003, I linked to "Saddam's Cash" (link), which mentions that trip and might have some bearing on the current case.

Posted to Iraq at 07:55 PM

Saddam Hussein Iraq files: no assassination plot? No AQ links? No WTC1 links?

I link, you decide:

[There was a] 1993 claim by the Kuwaiti government - accepted by the Clinton administration - that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) had plotted to assassinate President George H.W. Bush during a trip to Kuwait that spring.

...A just-released Pentagon study on the Iraqi regime's ties to terrorism only adds to the mystery. The review, conducted for the Pentagon's Joint Forces Command, combed through 600,000 pages of Iraqi intelligence documents seized after the fall of Baghdad, as well as thousands of hours of audio- and videotapes of Saddam's conversations with his ministers and top aides. The study found that the IIS kept remarkably detailed records of virtually every operation it planned, including plots to assassinate Iraqi exiles and to supply explosives and booby-trapped suitcases to Iraqi embassies. But the Pentagon researchers found no documents that referred to a plan to kill Bush...

...The failure does not, of course, prove that the Iraqis were not planning such an operation. "It would not have surprised me at all if the Iraqis expunged any record of that—it was an utter embarrassment for them," says Paul Pillar, the CIA's former top analyst on the Middle East. But others have wondered whether the original allegations were exaggerated...

[links to Ayman al-Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad but no apparent links to al Qaeda itself...]

...Perhaps most revealing of all was a tape of Saddam's conversations with his ministers after the World Trade Center bombing in February 1993 - a plot linked to a group of Islamic radicals, one of whom, Abdul Rahman Yasin, was an Iraqi-American who fled to Baghdad after the attack. For years Bush administration officials like Cheney and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz charged that Iraq had given "sanctuary" to Yasin, suggesting that the regime may have been complicit in the 1993 bombing. But the newly discovered tape shows that Saddam and his ministers were puzzled by the bombing and wondered whether the "Zionists" or U.S. intelligence were secretly behind it...

Posted to Iraq at 07:49 PM

False compassion from Iowa bishops/Iowa Catholic Conference; Rich Pleva, cheap labor pimp

From this:

..."The current debate about illegal immigration in Iowa needs an infusion of the Pope's message about love," said Monsignor Stephen Orr, speaking on behalf of the bishops of Iowa and the Iowa Catholic Conference. "The love of God does not stop at national boundaries. Immigrants crossing into the U.S. are in the need of love of neighbor that was commanded by Jesus."

The bishops are engaging in false compassion. If anyone wants to help them get on the right path, point that out to them at public meetings, videotape the exchange, and upload it to video sharing sites. Discrediting people is an extraordinarily powerful tool, but one which many opponents of illegal immigration don't seem to be concerned about using.

The state Legislature is considering a bill, House File 2610, that would curb illegal employment of immigrants by requiring all new employees to obtain a Midwest-issued driver's license or identification card.

...Without naming the specific bill, Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, United Church of Christ, Baptist, Presbyterian, Unitarian Universalist, Sikh, Episcopal, Methodist, Disciples of Christ, and Lutheran religious leaders today urged lawmakers to oppose initiatives that "will cause negative consequences" for immigrants.

...The Rev. Rich Pleva of the Iowa Conference of the United Church of Christ cited a study by the Iowa Policy Project that found that undocumented workers contribute more than $40 million in taxes in Iowa. [he then promoted getting SS and taxes from "immigrants"].

Also mentioned: Connie Ryan Terrell of the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:55 PM

Eric Hananoki/Media Matters tries pretending that McCain differs from Hillary and Obama on immigration

Eric Hananoki of Media Matters for America offers "Chicago Tribune falsely claimed Clinton, Obama, and McCain "essentially agree" on immigration" (mediamatters.org/items/200803250002):

Summary: In an article on immigration as a campaign issue, the Chicago Tribune reported that Sens. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain "essentially agree on the need for an overhaul of U.S. Immigration law that would combine increased border enforcement with a new guest-worker program and measures to permit the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country to eventually apply for citizenship." In fact, McCain has said he "would not" support his original comprehensive immigration proposal if it came to a vote on the Senate floor and now says that "we've got to secure the borders first."

The article is here. MMFA is just playing word games and confusing support for specific versions of legislation with the fact that all three candidates support amnesty.

McCain now says he wants to "secure the borders" first, but after that (probably largely symbolic move) he'd simply do the same thing as Obama and Clinton would do. All three are supporters of "comprehensive immigration reform", even if what exactly that means changes depending on the tactics they deem necessary to push it through.

3/31 UPDATE: Doubling down, "M.A." (full name unknown) offers '[Lou] Dobbs claimed there "isn't much difference" among the three candidates, except on Iraq' (mediamatters.org/items/200803310008). Note the lawyerly attempt to deceive: "As Media Matters has documented, Obama and Clinton both support comprehensive immigration reform. By contrast, McCain abandoned his previous support for comprehensive immigration legislation during his campaign for the Republican nomination.". He may or may not have abandoned his support for that specific piece of legislation, but not for the overall concept of amnesty.

Related:
Kathleen Henehan/Media Matters promotes economic benefits of illegal immigration
Media Matters for America plays word games re: their funding
Media Matters for America shows left's regard for free speech
Media Matters for America defending al Jazeera
Soros-funded Media Matters deletes yet another comment

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:39 PM

Swift meatpacking raid: manager pleads guilty, may testify against higher-ups

In December, 2006, Swift & Co.'s meatpacking plants in various cities were raided by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in what was probably a show raid.

Now, one of their former managers has pleaded guilty (link):

Christopher Lamb is a human resources manager at Swift & Company. He was arrested last summer after authorities recorded him coaching an illegal immigrant on how to use fake documents to get hired... In his plea, Lamb also admitted hiding an illegal immigrant at the plant from June 3rd to June 25th.

The real story will hopefully be this:

He is now expected to give prosecutors even more information about the hiring of undocumented workers at the plant, and his attorney thinks the case will move up the Swift chain of command.

Previously:
UFCW, Mexico-linked Peter Schey sue DHS over immigration raids (4th Amendment, yeah sure)
Crooked Towns: Sharon Cohen/AP on illegal immigration in Marshalltown, Iowa
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union supports illegal immigration, opposes "no match"
voceunidas.org is now the Swift Raid Collaborative (Mexico-linked Peter Schey)
Senators on Swift raid; "designed to fail"; Chertoff "not in the business of doing amnesty"
Swift hearing: Chertoff, Allard, Hatch, Klobuchar, Coleman, Harkin, Grassley
Tom Vilsack misled about Swift raid, DHS cooperation?
Swift and Company raids leading to collapse of Pork Industry?
Wall Street Journal not very Swift in support for illegal immigration
Swift slabs of pro-illegal immigration propaganda
Greeley, Colorado encouraging illegal immigration
Roxana Hegeman/AP: the $5 Swift sausage scare
What were the Swift & Co. illegal aliens thinking?
"Meatpacking raids: A victim's story" (Swift, identity theft)
PBS NewsHour's Soviet-style immigration coverage

Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:36 AM

Kevin Drum/Washington Monthly deletes yet another comment

Kevin Drum and/or the Washington Monthly have a habit of deleting perfectly reasonable comments; because of that you can't trust anything you read there. Comments sections serve as a form of check on the blogger or reporter; if they make a mistake someone will probably come along to point it out. If - like Kevin Drum and/or WM - they start deleting comments you never know what's missing, and it might be a comment offering a correction. So, every single thing he writes has to be double-checked before relying on it.

The latest example of a deleted comment is presented in the extended entry, as left on the thread washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_03/013403.php

As for why I'm forced to say "Kevin Drum and/or the Washington Monthly", I don't know whether it's Drum himself or someone else who does this. I asked him about it, but he was too cowardly to admit to doing it himself.

And, even as Drum/WM delete legitimate comments, they continue to have very major spam problem; see, for instance, the toxic stew at the end of washingtonmonthly.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=10203. If you link directly to WM, search engines might consider you part of those spammers' extended networks and that might have a negative impact on your site. I suggest dropping all your links to WM, using the plain text version as I used above if you still need to link to them

I'm not surprised to see Kevin Drum admit that he supports corruption and wants the U.S. to make money off illegal activity.

Nor am I surprised that he can't figure out what that implies: massive PublicCorruption as federal agencies turn a blind eye to lawbreaking.

What would surprise me is if Kevin Drum knew about all the actions the Bush admin has taken in this regard, such as strongarming a change that let banks profit from money that was earned illegally. And, how the FDIC is working with the MexicanConsulate to give home loans to IllegalAliens.

What would even surprise me more is if Kevin Drum could figure out all the costs associated with IllegalImmigration, including long-term costs and/or those without a direct financial impact.

Those Democrats with integrity and who put what's best for the U.S. ahead of the corrupt interests of the Democratic Party should reject attempts to profit from illegal activity and oppose PublicCorruption.

--
LonewackoDotCom

[Note: WM and/or KD have a habit of deleting and editing comments without notice, so this comment might disappear or be edited.]

Posted to Bloggage at 08:54 PM

Like a rock sinking like a stone: Mike Gravel joins Libertarian Party

I am laughing as I type the news that novelty Democratic Party candidate Mike Gravel has now joined the Libertarian Party. No, really.

The subhead of the LP press release is "Believes Democrats are out of touch with American citizens". So, logically enough, he's joined a party that's even more out of touch.

On the one hand it's good that Gravel was in the race, and it's not exactly a good sign that he was excluded from the debates, and it's good that to a certain extent he bucked the system (aside from things like supporting global governance and not caring about illegal immigration). But, on the other hand he was more or less a joke. On the other other hand, it's too bad he wasn't dragging down the Democrats even more than he did. But, on the other other other hand, at least he'll be providing his magic to the LP henceforth.

Posted to WackyHumor at 08:23 PM

Nativo Lopez has a blog

Nativo Lopez of the Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) and Hermandad Mexicana Latinomamericana has a blog:

nativolopez.blogspot.com

His hit counter currently stands at 218. I don't suggest leaving nastygram comments, nor do I suggest leaving long comments designed to discredit him since neither would serve a constructive purpose. However, it might be a good site to monitor in case he says something "interesting" as he's wont to do.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:00 PM

Michael Rubinkam/AP offers yet more "crops rotting in the fields" propaganda

Michael Rubinkam of the Associated Press offers yet another in the long line of "crops rotting in the fields" articles, which are propaganda designed to support an immigration amnesty and/or "guest" worker program. In the current case (link), it concerns the titular owner of Fred W. Eckel Sons Farms Inc. who says he's going to switch from tomatoes to mechanically-harvested corn because he can't find workers. For those not in the loop, Eckel is the top dog in the Pennsylvania fresh-to-market tomato industry.

Other than a few details, it's the same as the other articles and the replies are the same: offer more money and make sure you're doing business within the laws, try to change the laws, mechanize, or go out of business. It also includes this charming comment from Eckel which seems almost like a throwback to a different century or a different country:

"A lot of people think with immigration that we're talking about immigrants taking jobs from others. Let me tell you, there is no local labor that is going to go out and harvest those tomatoes in 90-degree temperatures except our immigrant labor... They come here to do a job that no one else will do in this country."

Carl Shaffer, president of the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau joined him at the press conference; Eckel isn't a participant in the H-2A program, since he finds it "too cumbersome".

UPDATE: When Keith Eckel speaks, cheap labor supporters across the nation listen!

One of the reasons might be this. Last month George Bush tabbed him for the U.S. Agency for International Development's Board for International Food and Agricultural Development. (The seven-member board advises the on agricultural priorities and issues. USAID is an independent federal government agency that provides economic and humanitarian assistance worldwide.) There are over 100 stories about his issues on Google news, yet not a single one mentions that appointment. I'm going to guess that not a single one also takes anything at other than face value and looks into whether he's part of a propaganda push for "guests".

Those who fail to look beyond the surface include sources such as RawStory (rawstory.com/news/mochila/Major_grower_ends_crop_lacking_work_03242008.html), CNN ("Migrant worker shortage crushes tomato farm", money.cnn.com/2008/03/24/news/economy/Immigrant_Labor.ap/index.htm), and Tom Bevan at RealClearPolitics ("A Test Case for Immigration", time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/a_test_case_for_immigration.html).

Another source is Nancy Petersen of the Philadelphia Inquirer (link). It includes various farm bureau reps engaging in scare-mongering and posturing (Congress needs to act, said Furey of the New Jersey Farm Bureau: "We need a national solution that is realistic, in tune with the economy and fair to the people."), and yet another fun comment from good ol' Hacendado Eckel:

"No one will harvest tomatoes in 90 degree weather except immigrant labor."

For comparison purposes, see this form letter the "Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy" wanted their members to send to their representatives:

I work in the construction business in Houston Texas. I am here to tell you that we cannot find enough American citizens willing to labor in the hot sun!

UPDATE: The subject of the article is Keith Eckel, not Fred.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 08:29 PM

Judge Wallace Tashima: Canyon County, Idaho can't sue over illegal immigration costs

From this:

In the decision handed down Friday, Federal judge A. Wallace Tashima [of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals] says [Canyon County, Idaho] can't prove that it suffered any harm as a result of businesses hiring undocumented workers.

Canyon County commissioners claimed the undocumented workers increased the county's tab for indigent medical care, schools and jails. The appellate court found that a government entity can't sue to recoup the costs of being a government entity.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:19 PM

Sorry, National Council of La Raza: NAACP will hold 2010 convention in Kansas City

The National Council of La Raza recently decided not to hold their convention in Kansas City, Missouri because the mayor of that city refused to remove someone who was a member of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps from their parks board. As could be expected, the Kansas City Star was on the wrong side, and Janet Murguia of the NCLR tried to mislead over this issue. The parks board member was later apparently harrassed by illegal immigration supporters, and subsequently resigned.

One of the threats from both the NCLR and the NAACP was that the NAACP would join in solidarity with the NCLR and not hold their convention there as well. However, they've just now announced that they will, in fact, be holding it in that city (link).

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:05 PM

Sleazy Jason Linkins smears Sean Hannity (Max Blumenthal)

How sleazy is Jason Linkins of the Huffington Post? Sleazy enough to post this smear of Sean Hannity, linking him to white supremacist radio host Hal Turner. The latter apparently used to call in to Hannity's radio program; he claims he and Hannity were friends until Hannity's Program Director told him no more call-ins. Yet, if you do a find for the comment from PhilBoyceWABC on the HuffPost link you'll see that Turner's account of their friendship is more than a bit questionable. Not only that, but Linkins' post relies on the Newshounds blog, not exactly a source of intellectual analysis. And, even worse, it relies on a Nation article from known liar Max Blumenthal which only includes one example of statements made by Turner when calling in and which includes a Turner quote from 2003 in which he said, "I had never judged people on their race, not prior to that point" (thenation.com/doc/20050620/blumenthal). Perhaps the Huffington Post should consider the impact that smear attempts from Linkins have on whatever reputation they currently have.

Posted to Bloggage at 08:35 PM

Was Eliot Spitzer set up over predatory lending? (Bush, banks, the Fed, and, yes, Greg Palast)

I confess that when the Eliot Spitzer story broke I felt like I'd won four free hours with Ashley Alexandra DuPre's librarian cousin and put aside all concerns about whether there was something else involved. Frankly, after the issue with driver's licenses for illegal aliens I didn't really care.

However, thankfully, Greg Palast rushed into the breach on the 14th of this month with this, raising the possibility that Elliot Spitzer was driven out of office due to his efforts to stop predatory lending practices:

This week, [the Federal Reserve Board, run by Chairman Ben Bernanke], for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks' mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure.

Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers’ bordello: Eliot Spitzer.

Who are they kidding? Spitzer’s lynching and the bankers’ enriching are intimately tied.

And, in fact, back on February 14th, Spitzer offered a Washington Post guest editorial called "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime/How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers" (link):

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks...

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

...When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan responded to Spitzer's claims here: occ.gov/ftp/release/2008-16.htm

A video with the provocative title "The Assassination of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer" (link) consists mainly of a reading of that editorial. On March 21, the New York Times - source of the report that started Spitzer's downfall - offered "U.S. Defends Tough Tactics on Spitzer" (link)

Obviously, at this point in time there's no evidence that Spitzer's downfall was the result of a conspiracy of some kind. But, it certainly isn't something that I'd put past the Bush administration.

Posted to Politics at 12:27 PM

DHS tries old "no-match" rule with new explanation (Judge Charles Breyer)

In October, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ordered an injunction against the Department of Homeland Security's attempts to begin enforcing "no-match" letters, where an employee's Social Security number doesn't match up with their name, such as would be the case with many illegal aliens but also with some U.S. citizens who've changed their names for various reasons. A coalition of illegal immigration supporters - the AFL-CIO, ACLU, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and others - asked the judge to issue an injunction, and he obliged. They pretended they were worried about discrimination and legal workers being fired, but their past statements and actions - including the money that the U.S. CofC has received from companies that profit from illegal immigration - tend to cast a great deal of doubt on that rationale.

Now, after a long and probably unnecessary delay, the DHS has issued a new rule which is apparently the same as the original rule. They have, however, changed the explanation and now they're asking the same judge to withdraw his injunction. They're also pursuing a separate appeal. Whether either effort will succeed and whether the DHS is just going through the motions in order to avoid actually enforcing the law is not clear.

From this:

Breyer, in his Oct. 10 injunction, said the unions' prediction of wholesale firings of legal workers was plausible. He stopped short of deciding whether the proposed rule was legal, but said Homeland Security had failed to explain its reversal of a decade-old government policy of not prosecuting employers on the basis of a discrepancy in a worker's Social Security number.

In the new draft unveiled Friday, Homeland Security disputed that the rule amounted to a policy change, arguing that it had always made it clear to employers that they should investigate the reasons for no-match letters and could not simply ignore them.

But even if the rule represents a change in policy, the department said, it is justified to clear up employers' confusion about their obligations under the immigration law.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 04:44 PM

MALDEF: Truth in Immigration website

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), has launched a new website called "Truth in Immigration" (truthinimmigration.org). Per this:

John Trasvina, president of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said Thursday the airwaves are dominated by anti-immigrant sentiment. His group launched the Web site to provide facts and contrary arguments to statements in media and on the Internet, Trasvina said... "Our idea in this Truth in Immigration Web site goes back to Thomas Jefferson's point of let us hear both sides," Trasvina said.

Gosh, it's so difficult for MALDEF to find their point of view presented. Except, of course, when the Associated Press interviews him for a promotion of his website, and it's then printed in the Houston Chronicle. And, of course, except for all the countless other AP, NYT, LAT, etc. etc. articles lying, misleading, or offering incomplete information about this issue.

Further:

1. MALDEF has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government.

2. The page truthinimmigration.org/CompleteStory.aspx?sid=13 implies they want to accuse those who oppose illegal immigration of encouraging illegal acts. I wouldn't put trying that past them.

3. The page truthinimmigration.org/Myths.aspx falsely implies that being here illegally is always just a civil matter, when in fact reentering (and, AFAIK, remaining here) illegally can be a felony.

4. That page also confuses some types of assimilation with full assimilation to our laws and culture. Many Hispanics do not want to culturally assimilate, and many - including MALDEF - seem to think some of our laws don't apply to those who are Hispanic. And, a small group - but one with political power - believes to some degree in Aztlan/reconquista.

UPDATE: Another MSM source promotes the new site, this time with Gary Martin of the San Antonio Express-News offering the almost completely pro-MALDEF "Immigration group looks to clear myths" (oddly enough, located in their Mexico section). Martin says the site is in "response to anti-immigrant sentiment", without quotes and without noting that most of the sentiment is opposition to illegal immigration and not so much against illegal aliens themselves and with very little sentiment being against immigrants, i.e., the legal variety. Martin then discusses a recent SPLC smear against FAIR in which they were named a "hate group". He fails to put that term in quotes, despite it simply being the SPLC's (incorrect) opinion. The term "anti-immigrant rhetoric" is used, without quotes and without any sort of analysis of how accurate that term is. Out of 13 paragraphs, two form as a sort of rebuttal by FAIR, but Martin prejudices the reader against them by first noting the SPLC's smear.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:39 PM

Notes from the Nick Gillespie/Matt Welch/Reason Magazine alternative universe (everyone's a libertarian!)

The brain trust of Reason Magazine, Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch, offer "Where the votes are". The laugh-a-minute article tries to pretend that the libertarian vote means something:

As David Boaz of the Cato Institute and David Kirby of America's Future Foundation note in a study of public opinion polls, roughly 15% of the electorate can be considered libertarian.

Just as long as you define things just right, and put as much spin as possible on "consider", that might be true. However, very few people are willing to sign on to the full libertarian platform (and even less to the Libertarian version), and even those with modified positions such as Ron Paul have a definite ceiling of support. Most Americans want the welfare state to be tweaked, they don't want it abolished. And, very few Americans would be comfortable with the level of immigration that most libertarians support, with some of those even supporting open borders. Which brings us to this:

Grant amnesty -- er, citizenship -- to illegal immigrants. Neither Democrats' fears that unskilled arrivals drive down union wages nor GOP concerns about assimilation are borne out by facts. Most new arrivals go to places with hot economies, and Spanish-speaking households go English-only at the same pace as previous waves of Jewish, Italian and Polish immigrants. Besides, a 2007 USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 59% of Americans believe that illegals should be allowed to become citizens if they meet minimal requirements.

1. Of course a massive influx of low-wage labor will drive down wages or at least lead to wage stagnation. And, there's large unemployment in certain sectors because of massive immigration.

2. They're confusing economic assimilation with the other varieties. It's great that illegal aliens buy consumer products, but that doesn't mean they've assimilated to our laws and culture. And, in fact, thinking that our laws don't apply to them or that part of our country is owed to them is fairly widespread by a certain segment of the Hispanic community.

3. They're implicitly engaging in a logical fallacy: just because yesterday's immigration worked out OK doesn't mean the current variety will.

4. Obviously, most polls on this topic are highly flawed, often featuring misleading or incomplete questions. And, that includes the Gallup poll they mentioned above.

Posted to Politics at 11:15 AM

Cara Fitzpatrick/PBP spins Mexican government textbooks in St. Lucie Florida schools (Michael Lannon)

Cara Fitzpatrick of the Palm Beach Post offers "Mexican official to give St. Lucie Spanish-language textbooks". This is yet another example of the Mexican government working with useful idiots and supposed Americans with divided loyalties to push their agenda inside the U.S. And, aside from briefly alluding to a past controversy (more below), Fitzpatrick completely fails to note any of the downsides of this scheme:

The St. Lucie County School District and the Consulate General of Mexico in Miami [Consul General: Juan Miguel Gutierrez Tinoco] plan to announce Monday a plan to distribute free Spanish-language textbooks to five schools, create some sister-schools and, perhaps, expand after-school tutoring options for parents with limited English-speaking abilities.

"We're very excited about this alliance we've created," said Ginger Miranda, chairwoman of the Hispanic Advisory Council [which pushed the partnership]. The council, made up of community members, advises the district about issues related to the Hispanic community.

Miranda is a (non-immigration) attorney in Fort Pierce, Florida, and originally from Chile (gingermiranda.com/?page=attorneys). In the future, they may use materials from Mexico's Plazas Communitarias program, which is similar to a GED program for adults.

The HAC was formed by Schools Superintendent Michael Lannon, who appears to be quite the far-left useful idiot. From the minutes of one of their meetings:

Mr. Lannon expressed his thanks to the Council members for their gift of talking about humanity and diversity in St. Lucie County.

And, from the other controversy, where they apparently want to use public funds to teach under the Plazas Communitarias program (but with the Mexican government itself handing out the diplomas), he said:

Nothing but positive news can happen as a result of this.

Those in the area who want to do something about this should find objectionable passages from the textbooks, which include history books that may present things from Mexico's point of view. Then, hold school administrators and politicians accountable by pointing out those passages at public meetings, starting recall drives against those politicians as necessary, and in any case trying to discredit them to the greatest extent possible. And, especially concentrate on Lannon, and let other administrators in the area know about your efforts to drive him from office.

Related:
Anna Gorman/LAT on Mexican adult schools operating at U.S. public schools
Esmeralda Bermudez spins Mexican textbooks in Oregon public schools
Mexico's propaganda textbooks promoted
Useful idiot watch: Minnesota gets Mexican propaganda textbooks
Beware of the Mexican government bearing gifts

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:18 PM

Barack Obama and Reverend James Meeks (so far not another Jeremiah Wright)

Sean Hannity is digging up dirt on yet another radical preacher linked to Barack Obama. This time it's Reverend James Meeks of Salem Baptist Church of Chicago, whose day job is as an Illinois state senator. However, this time around the links are a bit more tenuous than in the case of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Here's Rev. Meeks:

He's also "the executive vice president of Jesse Jackson Sr.'s National Rainbow-Push Coalition" (link). That page says he's one of his religious advisors, but he's not listed on this document supposedly listing those advisors from December 2007. On the other hand, the 2006 book The God Factor: Inside the Spiritual Lives of Public People by the unvetted author Cathleen Falsani says (link):

Another person Obama seeks out for spiritual counsel is Illinois State Senator James Meeks, who is also the pastor of Chicago's Salem Baptist Church and heir apparent to the helm of the Reverend Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. The day after Obama won the primary in March 2004, he stopped by Salem for Wednesday-night Bible study. "I know that he's a person of prayer," Meeks says. "The night after the election, he was the hottest thing going from Galesburg to Rockford. He did all the TV shows, and all the morning news, but his last stop at night was for church. He came by to say thank you, and he came by for prayer."

Meeks and several others were listed in December 2007's "African American Illinois Legislators Unanimously Endorse Barack Obama" (link). And, this says that while "Meeks was never very close to Obama, last month he was elected as a delegate pledged to Obama". More related to that and Meek quotes here. In 2005 news, apparently Meeks was pulled over by a cop and then tried to pull rank on him (link).

Note also that the video above was posted three days ago by the user 023chitown, who last logged in at that time and who only watched one video. In other words, 023chitown appears to have only signed up (at least under that name) to post that video.

This (from David Ehrenstein) says:

In 2004, during his U.S. Senate run, Obama campaigned at Chicago's Salem Baptist Church, whose leader, Rev. James Meeks, called same-sexuality "an evil sickness."

While there appear to be some links, unless something else surfaces they don't appear to be on the same level as the Wright issue.

Posted to Politics at 09:39 PM

"Stained Blue Dress Day": new national holiday; other Hillary Clinton scheduling notes

Breaking news from Brian Ross and the indefatigable ABC News Investigate Unit, who inform us that February 28th is now officially known as "Stained Blue Dress Day:

Hillary Clinton spent the night in the White House on the day her husband had oral sex with Monica Lewinsky, and may have actually been in the White House when it happened... The public schedule for Sen. Clinton on Feb. 28, 1997, the day on which Lewinsky's infamous blue dress would become stained by the president, shows the first lady spent the morning and the night in the White House.

I'm urgently perusing all 20 gigabytes of the PDF files (available here), and these are some other interesting tidbits I've found:

* December 21, 1992: "vacation in the mountains". Which mountains is not indicated.

* July 20, 1993: "Writing a note for a friend". The friend in question or what the note was about is not indicated.

* September 26, 1993: "quick trip to Little Rock". Once again, no details are provided.

Posted to WackyHumor at 07:52 PM

Democrats trying to add amnesty to enforcement-only SAVE Act (Hispanic caucus)

Both Democratic and Republican House members have signed on to the enforcement-only SAVE Act immigration bill, with Rep. Thelma Drake (R-VA) filing for a "discharge petition" (link) that, if it gets 218 signatures, would force a floor vote no matter what the Democratic leadership wants. It had 181 signatures as of Friday (updated list here).

Now, this has Rosemary Jenks from Numbers USA saying:

"[The Democrats] know that the American people want enforcement and will hold them responsible if they pass something that does not look like an enforcement bill... So essentially they are trying to negotiate a deal to attach various kinds of visas, including amnesty visas, to this bill... The [Congressional] Hispanic Caucus is driving the negotiations to attach an amnesty to the SAVE Act... They want something that they can go home and tell their special-interest constituents that they voted for in terms of amnesty."

The politics of the issue are discussed here.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 04:32 PM

Barack Obama speaking out of both sides of his mouth on welfare?

The Mickster deconstructs Obama's Sermon on Racism here, listing several problems with it. Commenter "fhdpjosc" offers this followup:

[Obama's] rhetoric is very carefully crafted to appeal to two different audiences: black and white. And the language he uses leaves each audience with opposite understandings.

...For example, Mickey calls this Obama comment a "Souljah moment":

"A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened."

...After hearing the quote above, white folks like Mickey go away thinking Obama considers welfare a bad thing, and black folks go away thinking Obama considers Clinton's welfare cuts a bad thing...

If true, that makes Clintonian Parsing look extremely crude in comparison.

Posted to Politics at 02:20 PM

McCain afraid to debate illegal immigration? (Lou Barletta invitation)

Earlier this month, Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton, Pennsylvania - currently running for Congress - invited Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain to his city to have a debate of some kind, saying in part:

If you are interested in addressing the issue of illegal immigration, then you must come to our city to hear our stories and learn how cooperation and effective leadership can work to correct the problem and how outside forces -- primarily in Washington, D.C. -- continue to work against our citizens

Now, per this, comes the word that John McCain has politely declined the invitation. Scheduling conflicts or something. The other two haven't responded at all.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:01 PM

Did someone try (and fail) to setup Lou Dobbs? (ICIRR, Citizen Orange)

Back on November 28, 2007 Lou Dobbs spoke at the Barnes & Noble in Chicago, and one of the audience members interrupted his speech with what could have been a semi-deranged outburst. Or, it could have been a braindead attempt by an illegal immigration supporter to provoke Dobbs, thinking he - or the audience - would say something noteworthy. If it was the latter, the provocateur failed. Obviously, I have no proof that he was a provocateur, but the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights - a group linked to the Mexican government - was there and not only protested the event but caught the incident on tape.

Video of part of his appearance is in this video (link), which is a derived product created by Kyle de Beausset of Citizen Orange (citizenorange.com) [1] from the original ICIRR-shot video (link).

After briefly speaking to one of the presumably ICIRR-associated protesters who were therapeutically chanting outside, it cuts to his speech in the bookstore. Just as Dobbs says "let's talk about race for a minute", someone yells from the back of the room:

Hispanics are not white, they're similar! They're not white. Get off the lie!

He's invited to the front of the room to speak, and he does so, saying the same basic thing, then storming out of the main room past the camera shouting the same basic things as he went.

At the end of the rant, Dobbs says "I want you to know, I appreciate your viewpoint" and "And I thank you for it." Which is pretty much the best thing to say to someone who appears to be a bit deranged, and needless to say is de rigeur in hostage crises.

The possibility that this was an attempted setup is amplified by the fact that the ICIRR protesters played a few other cute tricks that evening, including packing the hall and then exiting en masse. After The Big Walkout they went to a room upstairs to make noise.

Whether it was a setup or not, de Beausset's attempts to make hay out of this issue failed even among his fellows on the left:
dailykos.com/story/2007/12/3/16474/6721
bluemassgroup.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=9589

[1] citizenorange.com/orange/2007/12/lou-dobbs-race-baiter.html

Posted to Immigration2008a at 09:17 AM

Follow the lettuce: Western Growers endorses John McCain

From their press release (link):

Western Growers' Board of Directors has voted to endorse Arizona's John McCain in his bid to become the 44th president of the United States.

"Senator McCain has shown courage, determination and exceptional leadership skills in support of policies and principles important to Western Growers' members in Arizona and California," said Western Growers President and CEO Tom Nassif. "He has steadfastly promoted free markets, sensible fiscal policies, repairs of our immigration laws, and knows how important to our economy are the fruit, vegetable and nut producers in the west."

Frequent MSM quote source Jon Vessey is on their board. Through him and others, they've played a role in the long line of "crops rotting in the fields" articles.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:30 PM

Let me know if this works

Slow news day, so to pass the time I thought I'd see if I could induce spontaneous vomiting across the U.S. and the world. Let me know what happens.

If that doesn't hit the spot, try this, this, or this.

Posted to WackyHumor at 03:27 PM

The Rockefeller/Bill Gates/Monsanto seed bank (GMO crops)

Wading into unfamiliar territory, but this seems worthy of note:

Built on the island of Spitsbergen in the Barents Sea near the Arctic Ocean in the country of Norway, a group of wealthy corporations [including "The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, Monsanto Corporation, Syngenta Foundation, and the Government of Norway"] has invested millions of dollars in their project named the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. The mission statement is: "So that crop diversity can be conserved for the future"...

...An essential ingredient to this plan is none other than the hybrid seed. The key to hybrid seeds is their inability to reproduce. They are designed to not multiply. Seeds were originally designed to give yields similar to the parent seeds year after year. Not so of hybrid seeds. Subsequent yields are significantly lower and of lower quality. Declining yield necessitates farmers buying seed year after year to assure high yields. The big seed companies were now in perfect control as no smaller group could produce the hybrid but them. This was the foundation of the GMO seed revolution...

...The advantages of [Monsanto's] Terminator technology are obvious. Seeds yield only one harvest. Period. This forces farmers (the third world nations) to return to the seed companies year after year to replenish their seed supplies so that they can grow food to feed their people. Within 10 years, this could create a complete monopoly for these seed companies...

Posted to Miscellania at 11:23 AM

Mexican consulate spokesman: "This has been and will be Mexico"

On the following video you can see someone identified here as Alberto Lozano, spokesman for the Mexican Consulate in San Diego, tell a group of protesters in front of that consulate what the Mexican government really thinks:

"This has been and will be Mexico"

Expect apologists try say he was referring to the consulate property itself; see the first link. Expect them to also attempt the dodge of saying that the protesters shouldn't have told him to "go back to his third-world craphole"; indeed, they shouldn't have. However, the bottom line is that he told us exactly what they think of us:

Posted to Immigration_consul at 12:54 PM

Brave New Films: Robert Greenwald attacks Fox News "virus"

Robert Greenwald of Brave New Films has a new crusade: trying to stop the Fox News "virus" that supposedly spreads from Fox to the rest of the MSM, specifically as it relates to criticism of Barack Obama. Their foxattacks.com/virus page makes it clear that, if Greenwald had his way, Fox would be off the air:

Fox is a Republican mouthpiece, not a legitimate news organization. Real news organizations must reject Fox's smears of Barack Obama, not parrot them.

Rather than, for instance, simply pointing out issues with Fox's coverage, BNF wants to shut them out of the debate; in fact, they crow about having helped stop a Fox Democratic debate last year. And, their friends over at MoveOn link to that page and have a petition (pol.moveon.org/pac/donate/foxattacksobama2.html), implying that the "real" news organizations include NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and others.

Part 2 of their video is here. Discussing everything wrong with their videos on this topic is left as an exercise, but:

1. That video starts with Julie Banderas (on the Red Eye comedy show) calling Obama a "Halfrican" (urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=halfrican), which can mean someone who's half black, half white or half Puerto Rican, half white. It's not a pejorative, even if BNF wants its viewers to think it is.

2. It continues with Sean Hannity discussing Jeremiah Wright's supposed statement from January 18, 2008 that Louis Farrakhan "truly epitomized greatness", which they then connect with arrows to Tim Russert asking Obama about this during a debate on February 26. This is a perfectly valid question to ask, yet if Greenwald had his way it would not be. Note also that the New York Times article discussed at the last link mentioned Farrakhan, albeit without that specific quote.

However, Hannity misattributed it to Wright himself, when it actually came from Rhoda McKinney-Jones, managing editor of Trumpet Newsmagazine, which is part of Wright's church (tucc.org/trumpet.cfm) [1]. The misattribution may have been accidental or intentional, but in either case it's somewhat minor, considering that at the time Wright was the pastor of that church and ran the magazine. Rather than taking Hannity, Russert, and the others who misattributed it to task for that, their only concern is trying to stop questions like that being asked.

[1] If MMFA is to be believed (mediamatters.org/items/200803030010), Hannity followed by a day the quote's mention in a Washington Post column from Richard Cohen (link):

Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.

Posted to Politics at 12:45 PM

Linda Ellerbee's pro-illegal immigration propaganda for kids (Nickelodeon)

Former NBC News "reporter" and current Nickelodeon/"Nick News"-related producer Linda Ellerbee will have a special on that network this Sunday called "I'm American! They're not!" Not only is it propaganda designed to support illegal immigration, it's directed at children. From a review by David Hinckley (link):

Ellerbee starts the show by stressing that she's not taking sides in the larger immigration debate, just reminding us of its impact on children.

She visits three [apparently mixed-status] families - two where the parents were deported, one where the parents are still here and the children do their homework by flashlight to minimize any attention they might attract.

Yes, she's not taking sides, just trying to scare little kids and present a completely unbalanced view of the issue. If she had taken the parents to task for having children while here illegally expecting it to work out OK, or if she had pointed out that the only way to prevent such issues is to strictly enforce our laws, then she might have been presenting a balanced view. But, if she had done that then it would have been in the review. Her intent is clear: present an unbalanced side of the debate to children in the hopes that they'll lobby their parents to support "reform", something that will increase the numbers of mixed-status families and make the situation even worse.

Two other recent propaganda efforts are described in "Under the Same Moon": Mexican-government funded pro-illegal immigration propaganda film and Tim Padgett's dishonest look at illegal immigration ("Paraiso Travel" movie).

Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:54 AM

Tim Padgett's dishonest look at illegal immigration ("Paraiso Travel" movie)

Tim Padgett of Time Magazine offers "An Honest Look at Illegal Immigration", about yet another pro-illegal immigration movie, this one called "Paraiso Travel" and starring John Leguizamo:

...Immigration cranks like Lou Dobbs, but also the immigration advocates he lambastes, would do well to stop the cable cacophony for a couple hours and see this movie when it hits U.S. screens. "I wanted to make a film that makes Latin Americans think twice about traveling to the U.S. illegally," says its Colombian-born director, Simon Brand, "but one that also makes Americans think twice about how these people are treated once they get here." He scores on both counts. Adapted from the novel by Colombian author Jorge Franco, Paraiso Travel (paraiso is Spanish for "paradise") makes you consider the darker consequences of open borders and closed minds alike.

That's all well and good, but the bottom for Time Magazine remains the bottom line: pretend to be balanced, but at the end of the day end up supporting illegal activity, such as by calling Lou Dobbs a "crank" and the other questionable statements Padgett makes in the article.

Two other recent propaganda efforts are described in "Under the Same Moon": Mexican-government funded pro-illegal immigration propaganda film and Linda Ellerbee's pro-illegal immigration propaganda for kids (Nickelodeon).

Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:48 AM

"Under the Same Moon": Mexican-government funded pro-illegal immigration propaganda film

"Under the Same Moon" is a new, Mexican government-funded movie about illegal immigration from director Patricia Riggen. The distributors are Fox Searchlight Pictures and The Weinstein Company, and the production companies listed are Creando Films (website unknown) and Potomac Pictures (potomacpictures.com). And, per this, the "Financier" is Fidecine, which is the Mexican government agency designed to promote the Mexican film industry: www.comisionrtc.gob.mx/fidecine

Per the director ("A Child's-eye view of immigration woe" by Delfín Vigil, link):

"I'm not a politician, and I didn't write a political essay... I made a movie. I like entertainment and I like art. If the entertainment is meaningful, it becomes art. That's what I tried to do... [later:] ...Maybe by showing the human side, it becomes political... It's always easier to show a statistic or give the numbers on the economic impact of immigration. By showing the family impact, I think it becomes something that everybody can relate to."

In other words, it's just pro-illegal immigration propaganda. The article also confirms that "she won the trust of private investors and gained funding from the Mexican government". So, not only is it propaganda designed to support illegal immigration, it's funded by the government that profits from that illegal activity.

Two other recent propaganda efforts are described in Tim Padgett's dishonest look at illegal immigration ("Paraiso Travel" movie) and Linda Ellerbee's pro-illegal immigration propaganda for kids (Nickelodeon).

UPDATE: Reed Johnson of the Los Angeles Times offers a review in "Latino immigrants and their northern exposure" (link), and, yes, it's about what you'd expect coming from the LAT. He refers to the INS, an agency that hasn't existed for about five years. And, only on the second screen are we informed about the Mexican government link:

Shot mostly in and around Mexico City, on a budget of less than $2 million, the movie is one of only a handful of commercial films that have attempted to offer a transnational perspective on Mexican-American life. Funded in part by Mexico's national film commission...

And, Johnson takes braindead, by-the-LAT-stylebook swipes at those who support our laws:

TO all the people who think that the illegal immigration debate is about electronic fences, NAFTA, Lou Dobbs and such, director Patricia Riggen and screenwriter Ligiah Villalobos offer a polite but emphatic rebuttal... As for the thornier social issues that "Under the Same Moon" raises, the women suggest there's an urgent need to move the discussion on illegal immigration beyond talk-radio ranting...

The screenwriter also stumps for amnesty:

"I think that the issue is being hijacked by a very small group of people," says [Ligiah Villalobos]. "There are polls that are done on a regular basis about how Americans actually feel about the illegal immigrant issue. And most of the polls show that 60% to 65% of Americans believe that there should be a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants."

UPDATE 2: David Montgomery of the Washington Post offers "'Same Moon,' Seen From Cloud Nine". Despite taking up five screens, he completely fails to note anything about the movie's funding. And, like Johnson, he gets in his own braindead digs:

Turns out that generations ago [Riggens'] people immigrated to the United States, and her great-grandfather fought in the Civil War. Then that same loco great-gramps, William Henry Riggen, lit out to make a new life -- in Mexico. No word on whether he had proper immigration papers.

Obviously, Montgomery is too much of an idiot to understand how Mexico's laws are far more restrictive than those in the U.S.

And, Lewis Beale of the New York Daily News offers "La Misma Luna," an immigration drama with a novela touch. As with the preceding, he doesn't note the Mexican government connection.

UPDATE 3: I left a comment on the NYDN article, which was subsequently deleted. I left it again, let's see if it sticks this time:

[This comment was deleted before, despite not violating the NYDN's "Discussion Guidelines". Apparently they don't want you to know this.] What Lewis Beale "forgot" to tell you is that the movie was financed by the Mexican government: http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/007545.html It's propaganda designed to support illegal immigration, and financed by the govenment that profits from that illegal activity.

UPDATE 4: Lilia O'Hara of the San Diego Union Tribune offers "'Moon' director looks at 'the most powerful relationship that exists'", only saying that it was "binationally financed". How creative of her.

UPDATE 5: Iain Blair of Reuters offers "Mexican film puts human face on immigration"; like the rest, it doesn't reveal the financing. Likewise with the review from Peter Rainer of The Christian Science Monitor.

UPDATE 6: Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly also forgot to mention the funding.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:34 AM

Corporate global govenance? "Transatlantic Economic Union"? Open borders at the State Department

Today's must read article:

A largely unreported meeting held at the State Department [under the auspices of the Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy, or ACIEP] discussed integration of the U.S., Mexico and Canada in concert with a move toward a transatlantic union, linking a North American community with the European Union.

...Several participants said the premise of the [Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America/SPP] is to create a North American business platform to benefit North America-based multi-national companies the way the European Union benefits its own.

Others noted the premise of the [U.S.-EU Transatlantic Economic Council/TEC] is to create a convergence of administrative rules and regulations between Europe and North America, anticipating the creation of a "Transatlantic Economic Union" between the European Union and North America.

...Other participants argued regional alliances were still important, if only to put in place the institutional bases that ultimately would lead to global governance on uniform global administrative regulations favorable to multi-national corporations.

"North America should be a premiere platform to establish continental institutions," a participant said. "That's why we need to move the security perimeters to include the whole continent, especially as we open the borders between North American countries for expanding free trade."

...[One presentation included] Open Borders – to facilitate the free movement of labor to markets where employment opportunities are available.

The discussion pointed out the SPP trilateral working groups and the Transatlantic Economic Council were being supported by top-level Cabinet officers and the heads of state in both the EU and in North America.

WND also reported the Transatlantic Policy Network, a non-governmental organization headquartered in Washington and Brussels and advised by a bi-partisan congressional policy group chaired by Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, has called for the creation of a Transatlantic Common Market between the U.S. and the European Union by 2015...

Posted to NAU at 08:34 PM

USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez resigns (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services)

Emilio Gonzalez, the Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has resigned. At that link he compared immigration "reform" to the civil rights movement. He extended Temporary Protected Status. He launched welcometousa.gov.

And:

The GAO said USCIS doesn't have a handle on the size and scope of fraud, and [USCIS director Emilio Gonzalez] said he doesn't know how extensive the problem is nor could he say how many times the USCIS has pursued administrative or criminal penalties for fraud. But he said fraud is not overwhelming the agency.

And:

...he's the guy who fired USCIS contractor Sultan Farakhan for decrying the fact that he (and all USCIS employees at the time) as not allowed to check immigration applicants against terrorism databases. Oh, and Gonzalez gave monetary bonuses to employees for speeding through (and approving) immigration applications.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:40 AM

NPR: Get My Vote (National Public Radio, Cecilia Munoz, NCLR)

National Public Radio (NPR) has launched a new site called "Get My Vote" (getmyvote.npr.org), at which they solicit commentaries from their listeners describing what presidential candidates have to do to get their vote. Visitors can submit commentaries in video, audio, or text form. Think if it as a Volvo-driving version of the Youtube/CNN debates, although without any debates. They don't say anything about playing the commentaries for the candidates, only that they might be used on the air.

And, in keeping with the fine, NPR tradition, their pole position video is from Cecilia Munoz of the extremist-funding and -awarding National Council of La Raza (link). I left a comment, reprinted in the extended entry below. Why did they choose her as their keystone video, rather one from someone who supports our immigration laws? I have absolutely no idea. No, none at all.

If someone would like to raise the issue about the allocation of their publicly-derived funds (npr.org/getmyvote/about.html) - and try to make sure that they offer something approaching equal time to pro-borders groups - feel free to contact your representatives.

I may submit something at some future time, such as "in order to get my vote you have to discredit NPR over their 'debate'", or perhaps something else.

On the other hand, they do seem to have discovered one way to get hits.

UPDATE: I just noticed that the end of the video indicates that it was an NPR production.

Here's the comment I left on the Cecilia Munoz video:

"Immigrants" aren't Americans: an immigrant is someone who hasn't yet become a citizen. Once someone is a citizen, they might be a former immigrant, but they're no longer an immigrant. Why is that important? Because those who support illegal immigration - such as the NCLR - constantly try to blur the lines between the different varieties of immigration and the different statuses. So, for instance, when CM refers to "her community", what exactly does she mean? Does that include naturalized citizens, all Latinos, Mexican-Americans, immigrants, or what? And, considering, for instance, a recent NCLR study that suggested going easy on illegal aliens who'd been charged with identity theft, it's hard not to believe that her "community" includes illegal aliens. So, a reporter asking her about the costs of her "community" makes much more sense when you're familiar with the NCLR, including CM's attempts to play the victim and smear those who, unlike the NCLR, support our laws.

Posted to Politics at 11:10 AM

Songs of peace, freedom, and liberation... or a communist plot?

Where did the "Hippies" come from anyway? Was there an original hippie? If so, what is his name? How exactly did a social movement that still has an impact even yet today gain such influence so quickly? Bearing in mind that hippiedom occured contemporaneously with the Cold War and with us fighting a proxy war against Communism, could it have actually been a Communist plot, designed to soften us up and make our loss certain and perhaps make the spread of Communism easier?

And, was Grace Slick in actuality not simply a useful idiot for the Soviet Union, but in actuality an agent of that empire?

To those questions I have no answers.

However, the answer might in fact be in one of the suprisingly large number of high quality Jefferson Airplane videos available online. The embedded one below is my current favorite; it appears to be live as her phrasing is somewhat different from the recorded version. And, her facial expressions are quite interesting.

For extra hippie with a revolutionary aspect, see this version of Volunteers (link). Today is a good song, although the cameraman doesn't seem to realize that Marty Balin is the one singing it (link). Focus all you want on GS, I don't mind. For some extra acidity, see Eskimo Blue Day (link). Crown of Creation is also a great song (link). In High Flyin' Bird GS gets intenser (link). Here's a version of White Rabbit that Disney's lawyers have apparently missed (link). (Note: may induce seizures and/or flashbacks.) Up against the wall, hippies, and watch We Can Be Together (link). That actually makes hippies look somewhat OK.

Posted to WackyHumor at 10:12 PM

Barack Obama lies about Lou Dobbs to support illegal immigration

Yesterday's Lou Dobbs show on CNN featured a video clip from earlier that day of Barack Obama lying about Dobb's position on deportations (transcript link, video link):

When I hear Rush Limbaugh or you know Lou Dobbs or some of these people talking about how we need to send them all back. We're not going to send them all back. First of all, this is a country of immigrants. Second of all, as a practical matter, we would end up having to use all of our law enforcement resources to round people up, detain them, separate families. It's not a realistic solution.

That seques into a December 2007 clip from Obama, where he says:

We're not going to be able to solve the problem if we're just shouting about it like Lou Dobbs and folks on television.

When Obama refers to "send[ing] them all back", he's trying to raise the specter of mass deportations [1], complete with cattlecars. That's something that Dobbs doesn't support. In addition to lying, it's also interesting that Obama - a U.S. Senator - is supporting and apologizing for massive illegal activity. Just once it would be great if someone in the audience would call him on his lies and misleading and corrupt statements.

In the rest of the transcript it's a bit unclear exactly what Dobbs' position is. He raises the pandering ante on Obama by saying he won't send anyone back, but it's unclear on whether that's actually his position or whether he's simply trying to make a point. Also, American Patrol points out that Dobbs might be wrong about us deporting 10 million illegal aliens during the 70s. Nevertheless, while Dobbs did discuss on 60 Minutes that we could do mass deportations if we wanted to, that isn't the same as actually supporting mass deportations, and Obama is clearly lying.

[1] The word "deport" can have different meanings, including:
1. Mass deportations; see the images illegal immigration supporters paint of cattlecars or lines of buses.
2. Deporting illegal aliens from worksites and the interior in discrete cases, such as dozens or hundreds at a time.
3. Deporting criminal and fugitive aliens, with the same dozens or hundreds configuration as the previous.
4. Deporting those who've been caught at the border.
5. Encouraging illegal aliens to self-deport.

Posted to Politics at 01:16 PM

House GOP tries forcing Democrats' hands on SAVE Act (Heath Shuler)

From this:

House Republican leaders will introduce a petition drive today to force Democrats to debate immigration this year, using a Democrat-sponsored bill to box them into taking a stand on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

Republican leaders reached the decision yesterday evening to initiate a "discharge petition," a parliamentary move minority parties can use to force issues onto the House floor over objections of the majority. The last successful use was on campaign finance in 2002...

Republicans are using a bill [the "SAVE Act", HR 4088, link] sponsored by a conservative Democrat, Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, to try to force the issue. The bill would boost the number of U.S. Border Patrol agents and require businesses to check employees' Social Security numbers against a federal database, known as E-Verify. The system is currently voluntary...

The rest of the article concerns the low-level politics of the issue, and whether something like this will discomfort John McCain. I haven't read the SAVE Act, and, despite the fact that the other side's against it (immigrantslist.org/page/speakout/Save), there might be something in there that could lead to a national ID card or other issues. I won't comment on the bill itself until I've actually read it.

And, more "comprehensive" change would result from publicly embarrassing those, like McCain, who support illegal immigration by asking them tough questions and uploading their responses to video sharing sites.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:37 PM

Henry Fernandez lies about Jim Oberweis to support illegal immigration (libel?)

Henry Fernandez - a Senior Fellow at the Center For American Progress Action Fund who's also part of the Mexican government's "extended network" - offers "Anti-Immigrant Zealots Lose Hastert's Seat For Conservatives" (thinkprogress.org/2008/03/10/oberweis-immigration) about the recent Illinois House race in which Jim Oberweis lost to Bill Foster. The article contains this paragraph that strongly appears to libel both Oberweis and Mitt Romney:

Oberweis, a wealthy owner of dairy stores, was targeted by grassroots supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. They found he had the same problem as erstwhile Presidential candidate Mitt Romney - he employed undocumented immigrants while bashing them on the campaign trail. The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR) and the Chicago Workers Collaborative uncovered Oberweis’ hypocrisy. According to Joshua Hoyt, head of ICIRR...

(Bolding and link added). The family-owned Oberweis Dairy recently sued the DCCC over a similar charge, but that case seems much weaker. In that paragraph, Fernandez is explicilty claiming that Oberweis "employed" illegal aliens, when in fact the Dairy had a contract with a cleaning company, and the latter either employed or hired as independent contractors the illegal aliens. And, since there was apparently never any kind of court case involved, the two illegal aliens in question might in fact be legal residents.

And, while I haven't seen any of Oberweis' campaign materials, I'd imagine that "bashing" was actually pointing out the dangers of illegal immigration.

Fernandez also fails to note that the ICIRR is linked to the Mexican government. He also only uses the word "illegal" once, and that's in a quote from someone else. In his own text, he doesn't use that word once and only uses "undocumented" once, the rest of the time involves lying:

the conservative anti-immigrant strategy. Oberweis is an anti-immigrant zealot... Oberweis' staunch anti-immigrant views... Many conservative politicians hope that attacking immigrants is a magic electoral bullet... anti-immigrant rhetoric...

He also lies about or doesn't understand what would be involved in dealing with the anchor babies issue; no such revocation would be required:

Oberweis calls for denying children born in the United States to immigrants the right to U.S. citizenship, something which would require revoking the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:49 PM

Eliot Spitzer linked to prostitution ring, will resign

[UPDATE: Fox News reports he will resign. In his press conference he didn't say anything about that, but another event is set for 7pm NY time.

UPDATE 2: Mob links? This says it's in the court papers (PDF link), but a quick scan didn't bring anything up. That would indeed take this to the whole other level. Also, feel free to speculate on what "unsafe" activities Spitz apparently wanted to engage in. Perhaps he wanted her to play a "grateful" recipient of one of his driver's licenses/Motor Voter forms, or something.

UPDATE 3: This page shows that Spritzler had patronized their organization at least once before and had a $400 credit.

UPDATE 4: See the Hillary Clinton info below.

UPDATE 5: The feds weren't originally investigating the prostitution ring, but suspicious money transfers involving Spitzer, thinking he was on the take.

UPDATE 6: Ready for some mental dumpster diving? Jane Hamsher has questions. And, they're slightly coherent.

UPDATE 7: I don't want to link to "Spitzer Resigns From Emperors VIP Club", but I guess I just did. Also, "Aides Say They Expect Spitzer to Resign" (link), and Scott Horton has "A Few More Questions". It's all a VRWC conspiracy, at least in his mind.

UPDATE 8: It gets even better, believe it or don't: "Aide: Spitzer May Defy Calls To Step Down" (link). Could Unsafe Eliott be a GOP mole?]

Normally, I avoid things like this, but:

[New York governor] Eliot Spitzer has informed his most senior administration officials that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, an administration official said this morning.

Mr. Spitzer, who was huddled with his top aides inside his Fifth Avenue apartment early this afternoon, had hours earlier abruptly canceled his scheduled public events for the day. He scheduled an announcement for 2:15 after inquiries from the Times...

The governor's travel records show that he was in Washington in mid-February. One of the clients described in court papers arranged to meet with a prostitute who was part of the ring, the Emperors Club VIP on the night of Feb. 13.

Mr. Spitzer appeared on a CNBC television show at 7 a.m. the next morning. Later in the morning, he testified before a Congressional committee...

He's referred to as "Client 9" in court papers.

The "corruption fighter" was a client of Emperor's Clup VIP (emperorsclubvip.com), which now says the site has been disabled. Whether that was due to court action or the site owner's decision isn't known. An older copy can be found here: http://web.archive.org/web/20070820093133/http://www.emperorsclubvip.com/

UPDATE: Part of the court papers - not mentioning Spitzer - are here. A story on that is here:

"Raquel," who worked in New York and LA, was described as "an avid writer, actress and journalist."

Regarding the last, how could anyone tell?

HILLARIOUS UPDATE: Via this we learn that Spitser has been removed from Hillary's list of endorsers (hillaryclinton.com/news/endorsements). However, their web minions haven't been as thorough as they might hope, since there's still a blog post about the endorsement (hillaryclinton.com/blog/print/?id=5768), even including the following photo. And, it's also listed as an event (hillaryclinton.com/actioncenter/event/view/?id=1070&sc=8).



When that picture goes away, you'll know they've completely erased the record. Thankfully, I saved a copy.

Earlier:
Felipe Calderon greets Eliot Spitzer on his recent visit
Eliot Spitzer drops driver's licenses for illegal aliens (Hillary updates position)
Rasmussen poll: 77% oppose driver's licenses for illegal aliens
Spitzer supporter: "You made me make a fool out of myself" (details on his switch)
New York Times to Eliot Spitzer: die on the driver's licenses for illegal aliens hill
Feds strike deal on Eliot Spitzer driver's licenses for illegal aliens (victory or defeat?)
Spitzer driver's licenses and illegal aliens voting (Motor Voter)
Richard Clarke endorses Spitzer license scheme; opposed DLs for illegal aliens in June
Smoking gun emails: Spitzer retaliated against opponent of his driver's license scheme
72% oppose Spitzer driver's licenses for illegal aliens; lowest rating ever
9/11 Commish: al Qaeda "will be able to come to New York" with Spitzer driver's licenses
New York Immigration Coalition supports Spitzer driver's licenses for illegal aliens plan
Michael Bloomberg, DHS against Spitzer illegal aliens driver's licenses plan
New York county clerks oppose Spitzer on driver's licenses for illegal aliens

Posted to Politics at 11:32 AM

Barack Obama, just another Chicago politician (deal with Daley machine?)

From this:

Taking no chances, Daley called Obama in for a series of meetings that lasted two months. Obama’s major problem with Daley was that he was a corrupt sonnovabith, having just seen 4 of his top aides convicted in the city’s largest patronage scandal. It seemed a given that the squeaky clean Obama would endorse the candidate promising to clean up city hall.

Then, in late December of 2007, the tumblers all clicked into place and Daley made his nearly unprecedented endorsement of Obama for president. About the same time, it was announced that his brother Bill would be going to work for the Obama campaign...

...So what did Obama promise in return?

In effect, Obama surrendered to the Machine by promising to endorse its corrupt mayor rather than his reform minded challenger...

Posted to Politics at 01:50 PM

Bill Foster beats Jim Oberweis for Hastert seat (smear by Mexico-linked ICIRR helped)

Democrat Bill Foster beat Republican Jim Oberweis 53% to 47% in a special election for Dennis Hastert's former House seat in Illinois (link). Foster will only serve until the end of the year; a new election will take place in November for the full term. There are no doubt many reasons for the GOP losing one of their apparent strongholds, but one possible reason is a 2005 smear from the Mexico-linked Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights which the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) repurposed for the latest race.

In the 2005 smear, two illegal aliens were hired by a subcontractor to clean a few of the stores owned by Jim Oberweis' family dairy. Purely by coincidence, a video shot by the Chicago Workers' Day Laborer Collaboration caught the two in the act, and then the ICIRR and the CWDLC helped the two illegal aliens file a labor complaint alleging that they'd been paid below the minimum wage. Oberweis called the two "plants", and that certainly appears to be a very correct assessment. More on the incident here, here, and here. Oberweis Dairy has since fired the subcontrator and, according to them, they were never served with a labor complaint.

This time around, the DCCC ran a TV spot (youtube.com/watch?v=J_asTXB7OkI) referencing the incident, without, of course, revealing ICIRR's link to the Mexican government and the fact that the incident looked for all the world like a smear. Oberweis Dairy has now sued the DCCC for libel, with the DCCC responding with an FEC complaint (link). Whether the DCCC worded their smear ad correctly remains to be determined; they say that "Illegal immigrants worked at Oberweis' own dairy stores", which isn't the same thing as saying that Oberweis Dairy hired them.

And, throughout all of this, the fact remains that the Democratic Party strongly supports illegal immigration and Oberweis opposes it. In that way, it's a bit like drug runners trying to frame a DA by planting drugs on him.

Posted to Politics at 01:06 PM

Denver public school system dumbs down "highly gifted" program to be more "equitable" (ACLU)

Jeremy Meyer of the Denver Post offers 'Minorities, poor get "highly gifted" lift/A new DPS system awards some kids an extra boost to make things more equitable', but don't worry it's even worse than it sounds:

...To determine who gets into [their "highly gifted" program], the [Denver Public School district] previously relied on oral tests that measure a student's reasoning and IQ.

To make things more equitable, the district now relies on a sum of measures to determine eligibility into the highly gifted program — cognitive tests, annual assessments, reading tests and teacher nominations. Next year, the district will consider artwork and writings.

Also, students get extra points toward entry into the program if English is their second language or if they receive federal meal benefits — a measure of poverty.

For example, a student who scores as low as the 75th percentile on cognitive tests could be considered, [Diana Howard, principal at Polaris at Ebert, the district's sole elementary school for the highly gifted and talented] said. Previously, that child would not have been admitted...

"Gifted" should mean smart, not artistically talented, since those are entirely different traits and in many cases not present in the same person. Those who are able to take challenging math classes may not do that well in painting classes, and vice versa. They might end up having two different math classes: those for the students who are really gifted, and those who've just been declared "gifted" by the administrators.

And, by including subjective measures such as assessments and nominations in the mix, they're opening themselves to teachers and administrators deciding to give an "extra boost" to certain less-qualified students who hold left-leaning political views or who are of the same race as the teacher or administrator. All the other issues involving affirmative action - and its pushers like Howard and the Denver Post - apply as well.

And, as might be expected:

The American Civil Liberties Union in California last year threatened to sue the Tustin Unified School District over low numbers of Latinos and African-Americans in the district's gifted programs.

Then, we find out that one of DPS's officials needs to go back to math class and learn that school resources are not infinite:

"If there are a limited number of slots in those programs, then the wealthier student who is excluded will always feel wrongly excluded if their test scores were higher than a lower-income student or Hispanic student who was included," [Joshua Wyner, executive vice president of the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation] said.

Jaime Aquino, DPS's chief academic officer, said adding more highly gifted students will not exclude others.

"Every school gets an allocation per student who is identified as gifted and talented, so they can provide them some enrichment or some differentiated services within the building," he said. "You have several magnet programs throughout the district. Many still have room. It's just whether the parents want to send their kids to those schools."

Hopefully they'll get sued either by one of the American counterparts to the ACLU or by some of those parents whose children have been excluded from the program.

Posted to MultiCultiCult at 04:21 PM

Barack Obama supporters: why you should vote for Lim Guan Eng instead

Here are just some of the reasons why Barack Obama supporters should vote for Lim Guan Eng instead:

1. Just like Obama, Lim Guan Eng is the candidate of change.

2. The Democratic Party is truly an international party, and, just as foreign citizens have every right to vote in U.S. elections, Democrats have every right to vote in Malaysia's elections too.

3. Lim's party, the Democratic Action Party, is only one word off from the Democratic Party. Close enough!

4. The DAP might be even further left than Obama, being a member of the Socialist International (dapmalaysia.org/newenglish/int_solidarity.htm). Barack Obama is not a member of the Socialist International, as far as I know.

5. Teresa Kok Suh Sim (dapmalaysia.org/newenglish/au_l_n.htm)

6. The USDP's (U.S. Democratic Party) symbol is a tired old donkey. The DAP has a nifty, Space Age logo: a rocket (dapmalaysia.org/newenglish/au_sr.htm).

7. Unlike the donkey (or the plodding elephant), the rocket actually means something:

The blue circle stands for the unity of the multi-racial people of Malaysia. The white background stands for purity and incorruptibility. The red rocket symbolizes the Party's aspiration for a modern, dynamic and progressive society. The four rocket boosters represent the support and drive given to the Party objectives by the three major races and others

8. The rocket's as dynamic and forward-looking as the DAP. As shown here, it can be morphed into a friendly, smiling, anthropomorphic figurine. Obama has no such symbol.

For those reasons and more, I urge you to vote for Lim and not Obama.

Posted to WackyHumor at 03:26 PM

Casa de Maryland advertising moving, childcare, laborers on Craigslist

Casa de Maryland - a state-funded group headed by Gustavo Torres that runs day laborer centers and which has, among many other things, published a guide giving legal advice to illegal aliens - advertises their workers on the Baltimore edition of Craigslist.

The ads offer childcare, moving, fix-it, painting, drywall, general labor, and other services. And, given that somewhere around three-quarters of day laborers are illegal aliens (the percentage of their workers who are may vary, of course) and that Casa is well known as an advocate of illegal immigration, their actions have the impact of further undercutting local wages in those fields. It's bad enough that Casa undercuts wages by operating a center; they compound the problem by advertising it in this way. And, of course, in none of the ads that I reviewed do they mention anything about their advocacy, only that they're a "non-profit organization". And, in the "License info" section of one of their ads, they note that they're "Unlicensed".

One ad is here, although this URL will eventually expire: baltimore.craigslist.org/kid/550142484.html

More ads can be found through this search:
google.com/search?q=site:craigslist.org+%22casa+de+maryland%22&filter=0

And, more ads are cached here.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 02:21 PM

Jorge Bustamante/U.N./Notre Dame/Mexico proposes hobbling U.S. immigration enforcement, ACLU approves

The ACLU offers a press release (aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/34377prs20080307.html) entitled "International Human Rights Experts Denounce U.S. Record On Racial And Ethnic Discrimination" about a "strongly worded critique" and list of recommendations released by the United Nations' "Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination". As discussed at that link, the ACLU was one of the "human rights" groups which testified in Geneva, Switzerland.

In addition to the main report, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants - Jorge Bustamante of Mexico - released his own report "on the injustices faced by migrants and immigrants in the U.S." As discussed at the last link, Bustamante met with the Mexico-linked Peter Schey on a recent tour, and in 1995 he supported Mexican immigrants obtaining U.S. citizenship in order to push Mexico's agenda inside the U.S.

Needless to say, the ACLU is behind him all the way:

"The U.S. should heed the recommendations of this international expert and do more to create fair, humane policies and conditions for immigrant communities in this country," said Chandra Bhatnagar, staff attorney with the ACLU Human Rights Program. "It's time for the government to match its soaring rhetoric on the importance of human rights globally with a renewed commitment to protecting the rights of vulnerable immigrants here at home."

The ACLU is calling on the government to adopt the recommendations made by Bustamante in his report, including:

* Eliminating mandatory detention of undocumented immigrants and determining whether non-citizens pose a risk to society on a case-by-case basis;

* Allowing immigrants in detention the chance to have their custody reviewed before an immigration judge;

* Creating binding human rights standards governing the treatment of immigration detainees in all facilities, including the removal of non-citizen children from jail-like detention centers;

* Establishing standards for the mental and medical health needs of migrant women who have been the victims of mental, physical, or sexual abuse;

* Ending harassment and racial profiling of migrant workers by local and federal law enforcement agents; and

* Ensuring health, safety and labor protections for migrant workers and providing health benefits for migrant workers injured on the job.

The first would basically have us doing catch-and-release again. The fourth (about "migrant" women) is similar to the program that Schey collaborated with the Mexican government on. The fifth is an attempt to portray Hazleton-style laws as simply profiling and abolish such laws. The last would, of course, be a massive giveaway to not just crooked employers but to the Mexican government.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 09:46 PM

"Civil Rights Act of 2008" admits illegal aliens "undermine the living standards and working conditions of all Americans" (Kennedy, Clinton, Obama)

From our "Isn't it Ironic" file comes the "Civil Rights Act of 2008", brainchild of Senator Ted Kennedy (S.2554, link). Among no doubt many other things, it seeks to close a defense that employers can use when an illegal alien is fired and sues for back pay.

In so doing, the bill admits that employers being able to hire illegal aliens "undermine[s] the living standards and working conditions of all Americans", a somewhat shocking admission considering that almost every leader of the Democratic Party constantly bends over backwards to support and enable illegal immigration. The bill also admits that being able to hire illegal aliens gives those employers an unfair advantage. However, as yet another example of the Dems' inabilities to understand the impacts of their policies, there's nothing in there about enforcing our immigration laws as a way of avoiding problems in the first place. Could their plan be used as a form of attrition? Yes, it might actually reduce illegal immigration by reducing the incentive and thus causing some to go home and others to decide not to come here. However, not so in practice, since with the other hand the Dems would be waving people across our borders.

Nevertheless, a question based on this plan might be a good thing to ask one of the candidates. Since they support something that - absent amnesty - would have an attrition-like effect, why not support attrition through enforcement? And, of course, since they admit the downsides of illegal immigration, Obama and Clinton should be asked exactly how many instances of enforcement of our immigration laws they've supported.

Co-sponsors include:
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama (press release here)
Dick Durbin
Barbara Boxer
Chuck Schumber
Bob Menendez
...and several more.

After a bit of a warm-up and a to-be-expected concern about racial profiling, here's the relevant bits:

...(5) ...In the wake of the Hoffman decision [Hoffman Plastic Compounds Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002)], defendant employers will now argue that backpay awards to unlawfully discharged undocumented workers are barred under Federal employment statutes and even under State employment statutes.

(6) Because the Hoffman decision prevents the imposition of sanctions on employers who discriminate against undocumented immigrant workers, employers are encouraged to employ such workers for low-paying and dangerous jobs because they have no legal redress for violations of the law. This creates an economic incentive for employers to hire and exploit undocumented workers, which in turn tends to undermine the living standards and working conditions of all Americans, citizens and noncitizens alike.

(7) The Hoffman decision disadvantages many employers as well. Employers who are forced to compete with firms that hire and exploit undocumented immigrant workers are saddled with an economic disadvantage in the labor marketplace. The unintended creation of an economic inducement for employers to exploit undocumented immigrant workers gives those employers an unfair competitive advantage over employers that treat workers lawfully and fairly.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 09:09 PM

Border counties spent over billion on illegal aliens in justice system, got little from Feds (SCAAP)

Randal Archibold of the New York Times offers "Border Counties Shortchanged in Immigrant Costs, Study Says" (link):

Counties along the Mexican border from California to Texas are shortchanged millions of dollars a year in costs related to prosecuting and jailing illegal immigrants, according to a study released Wednesday.

The study was by the University of Arizona and San Diego State University on behalf of the United States/Mexico Border Counties Coalition, a group representing the 24 border counties.

Cumulatively, the counties spent $1.23 billion from 1999 to 2006 to process illegal immigrants in the justice system, the study found. Federal programs offset only a fraction of those costs, and often did not receive the maximum level of financing that they are authorized to receive, the study said...

You can get a copy of the study here. The Federal government has a program to reimburse states for such costs, called SCAAP ("State Criminal Alien Assistance Program"). Looking at the PDF available elsewhere at their site indicates that those same counties only received around $60 million through that program in the same time period.

However, the use of the word "shortchanged" in the NYT title assumes that those costs should have been incurred in the first place, when the opposite is true. The NYT's implicit response is simply to increase the funding, when what should happen is the Feds should be strongly encouraged to enforce our laws in the first place.

Related:
Bush budget: more for border patrol, none to jail illegal aliens
Feds paid $2 billion/year to jail criminal aliens
"[CA] should not pay to clean up immigration"
Bush refuses to pay for the trouble he causes

Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:32 PM

CBP Commissioner Ralph Basham blackmails Congress on securing border; "virtual fence", real fence this year?

From this:

The United States may be unable to meet its timetable for essentially stopping illegal immigration across its border with Mexico by 2011, a Bush administration official told Congress on Thursday.

Ralph Basham, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said the government was working to meet the target set in November 2005 of having "operational control" of U.S. borders within five years.

But he said the goal of the so-called Secure Border Initiative was based in part upon assumptions, such as passage of comprehensive immigration reforms, that have not been met.

"We're going to be pushing to meet those goals ... but I cannot with any assurance tell you right now that we'll meet them," he said.

For past examples of Bush administration officials refusing to do their jobs unless they get "reform", see Newt Gingrich: Bush administration is blackmailing U.S. (won't enforce laws unless gets amnesty) and, from over two years ago, Is DHS head Michael Chertoff refusing to do his job?

And, from this:

...CBP Commissioner Ralph Basham and other agency officials sought to assure lawmakers that the projects were moving forward despite recent press disclosures that the pilot project in Arizona, known as Project 28, was riddled with flaws.

Basham, saying the press accounts were wrong, acknowledged that the $20 million program had sustained early setbacks. But he said the project rebounded after the contractor, Boeing, spent its own money to correct most of the deficiencies. The program was certified by DHS in February and has surpassed original expectations, Basham said.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 08:25 PM

Overview of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) failures

Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post celebrates the DHS's fifth-year anniversary with this two-pager list of their problems and failures:

...the ever-growing list of troubled programs illustrates the extent to which each new crisis -- from the 2001 terrorist attacks to Hurricane Katrina to the Dubai ports scare to the Bush administration's push for comprehensive immigration policy revisions -- has forced DHS leaders to launch costly initiatives with broadly defined goals that wind up missing their targets...

Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:29 AM

Memo: we already knew Hillary Clinton reassured Canada on NAFTA

Ever-excitable Andy (link) and others (link, link, etc.) are up in arms over this report pointing out where "NAFTAgate" - the story that Barack Obama's senior economic policy advisor reassured Canada that the candidate's position on NAFTA was mostly just bluster - originated:

A candid comment to journalists from CTV News by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's most senior political staffer [chief of staff Ian Brodie] during the hurly-burly of a budget lock-up provided the initial spark in what the American media are now calling NAFTAgate...

...[a "source in the room" says] "[Brodie] said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . . That someone called us and told us not to worry."

Government officials did not deny the conversation took place.

They said that Mr. Brodie sought to allay concerns about the impact of Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's assertion that they would re-negotiate NAFTA if elected. But they did say that Mr. Brodie had no recollection of discussing any specific candidate — either Ms. Clinton or Mr. Obama...

What those now excited about this report have apparently forgotten is that it was pointed out in initial reports that both candidates were involved; see my 2/28 post "Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton told Canada their NAFTA talk was just bluster?".

UPDATE: The Austan Goolsbee memo is here. Per this:

[The Macleans reporter] notes that the famous line on "political positioning" is a paraphrase, not a quote, and could reflect a misunderstanding. But the memo also says Goolsbee not once, but twice, reassured the Canadians that changes to NAFTA won't be profound. Along with the oft-quoted claim that he'd described the NAFTA politics as "political positioning," the report says he was at another point in the conversation "quick to indicate that the senator is less interested in fundamental changes to the agreement and more looking at clarifying language on labour mobility and environmental standards."

Posted to Politics at 10:27 AM

Win a date with Scarlett Johansson (and support Oxfam America)

Scarlett Johansson is auctioning off a date with her to attend a movie premiere, and the proceeds will benefit Oxfam America. Don't even think about what that sounds similar to or the fact that the following is an AffiliateLink and just click here to bid on your fun time with Scarlet. In addition to Ms. Johanson, you can also bid on "dates" with heretofore-unknown-to-me personages Kristin Davis, Djimon Hounsou. Those who are looking for a bargain should probably bid on the "date" with the Counting Crows. (Note: most of those will not include the possibility to get "acquainted" with the celebrity in question, although I recommend a stylish aftershave, NLP lessons, and a hopeful demeanor just in case.)

Posted to WackyHumor at 08:47 PM

Campaign to Defend America launches anti-John McCain ad (George Soros, MoveOn, CAP, SEIU, Fund for America)

A group called "Campaign to Defend America" ("CDA") has released an anti-John McCain ad that you can see here. They're supposedly going to be spending in the low seven figures running it on TV. It points out various ways that McCain is "McSame as Bush". Cute. And, it also ends with a rather questionable photo of McCain hugging Bush.

When I first heard about this, one name flashed like a neon sign everywhere I looked. And, it turns out I was right.

From this we learn that the CDA got $1 million from the Fund for America ("FFA"), which in turn was funded by $2.5 million from George Soros, with an equal amount coming from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The board of FFA includes: "Rob McKay, the chairman of the Democracy Alliance; Anna Burger of Change to Win; and John Podesta, of the Center for American Progress". The FFA also gave $1 million to "America Votes, a Soros-backed group".

Previously, the CDA ran noiraqescalation.org; the site says it was paid for by them at the bottom of each page. On their about page it says:

Americans Against Escalation in Iraq is a group of independent entities, including the Service Employees International Union, MoveOn.org Political Action, VoteVets.org, Center for American Progress Action Fund, USAction, Win Without War, Campaign for America's Future, the United States Student Association, Working Assets, Americans United for Change, Campus Progress Action and Nation Security Network, that have banded together as a coalition to launch a multi-faceted, multi million dollar effort in fifteen target states to education the American public about the true costs of the war in Iraq, mobilize opposition against President Bush's Iraq policy, as well as apply on-going pressure on members of Congress to oppose this failed policy.

According to this, the CDA is "associated with the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org".

From last month (link):

Eddie Vale is joining the Campaign to Defend America as its Press Secretary. Vale was previously the New Hampshire Press Secretary for John Edwards’ presidential campaign and also worked as Communications Director for Ned Lamont’s Senate campaign in New Hampshire.

More here and here.

A nifty thing to have would be an online "George Soros Front Group Name Generator" so he can spend more time spending his money.

Posted to Politics at 11:45 AM

Real border fence not built, virtual fence on hold

A border fence wouldn't be necessary if we could discredit those politicians and others who support illegal immigration. And, it's currently being used by John McCain and was used by others such as Mike Huckabee as an example of how they were going to crack down on illegal immigration. However, from this:

Over a year ago, Congress passed a law to spend over $7 billion to build a fence to secure our Mexican border. Less than two weeks ago, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced at a news conference that a high-tech "virtual fence" project on part of the U.S. border with Mexico was finally ready for service, and that the technology that was a substitute for an actual physical fence — you know, cement, barbed wire, watch towers, moats.

...But only five days later, the media reported that the Bush administration has scaled back plans to quickly build a virtual fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, delaying completion of that first 28-mile phase by at least three years and shifting away from a network of tower-mounted sensors and surveillance gear.

Technical problems in the same 28-mile project that Mr. Chertoff had personally vouchsafed just five days before were cited by Homeland Security Department officials as the reason for the three-year delay — which, let me remind you, the secretary had said just five days before it was ready to go operational...

I am not by nature a believer in large political conspiracies - noting that usually events can be explained by merely a conspiracy of idiots against the forces of reason. And so perhaps in this case, too...

Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:59 AM

CNN/Lou Dobbs knuckled under to "We Can Stop the Hate" pressure? (American Jewish Committee)

The extremist-funding and awarding National Council of La Raza recently started a "We Can Stop The Hate" campaign with several other groups, including a few with indirect links to the Mexican government. Their first action was to encourage cable TV networks to have pro-borders spokespersons either removed from their broadcasts or to have their supposed affiliations disclaimed. It specifically involved Lou Dobbs Tonight (CNN), The O'Reilly Factor (Fox), and MSNBC News Live.

One of the "We Can Stop The Hate" groups, the American Jewish Committee, has now proclaimed victory in that campaign, at least against CNN, the only of the networks that responded to them (ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=849241&ct=5082085):

[Jeffrey Sinensky, AJC general counsel says:] "CNN was the first, and so far only, one of the three cable networks to respond to our concerns about giving a microphone to individuals and organizations that promote hate, espouse vigilantism, white supremacy, or even violence in the immigration debate... We are pleased that [CNN President Jim Walton] recognized the merit in our concerns and will be taking steps to assure that spokespeople on immigration are more fully identified for television viewers."

Whether they're just trying to put a happy face on a form letter, or whether CNN has actually buckled and will try to muzzle Lou Dobbs and other shows remains to be seen, but the only response provided doesn't look much like anything beyond a form letter:

CNN remains "committed to covering this complex issue by presenting diverse perspectives and viewpoints throughout our coverage across all of our platforms," said Walton. "We agree that it is important to inform our viewers about the backgrounds and affiliations of the guests or commentators that appear on our air."

Note, of course, that aside from Dobbs CNN isn't known for fair coverage, so whether we'd notice any difference isn't clear.

Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:32 AM

The Laura Carlsen Farce (denies North American Union from slightly-honest Left)

Laura Carlsen of the "Americas Program, Center for International Policy" (who also blogs at americasmexico.blogspot.com) offers "The North American Union Farce" (link). She raises issues with the Security and Prosperity Partnership, but she also disputes that it could be a precursor to a North American Union. This is the "slightly-honest Left" version of NAU denials, as opposed to those on the Left who are useful idiots or worse and who reflexively dismiss all concerns simply because of those who express those concerns (a recent example: Alex Pareene). She has her own issues to deal with:

While the lack of transparency and the U.S. corporate and security-dominated agenda of the SPP are cause for great concern, they are not evidence of a plot to move toward a North American Union. Among the most bizarre assumptions of NAU scaremongers is the contention that the SPP will threaten U.S. sovereignty and erase borders. The idea of a regional union that effaces U.S. sovereignty is light-years away from George W. Bush's foreign policy of unilateral action and disdain for international law and institutions. On the contrary, the precepts of the Bush administration's foreign policy point to a return to the neocon belief that the world would be a better place if the U.S. government just ran everything.

Of course, under some form of continental integration, the U.S. - or at least U.S.-based elites working with elites in the other countries - would be the ones running things, all comfortably unilateraly.

Then, it's on to the, "stop worrying about your issues, worry about mine!" part:

Given the absolute lack of factual data to support the existence of a secret plan to create a North American Union, it's tempting to assume that the NAU scare was put forth as a red herring to divert attention from real issues facing the country. By channeling the insecurities of white working-class Americans into belief in an attack on U.S. sovereignty, the NAU myth obscures the very real globalization issues raised by NAFTA—job loss, labor insecurity, the surge in illegal immigration, and racial tensions caused by the portrayal of immigrants as invaders. This is convenient for both rightwing politicians and the government and business elites they attack because real solutions to these problems would include actions anathema to the right, including unionization, enforcement of labor rights, comprehensive immigration reform, and regulation of the international market. Instead, these options are shunted aside with the redefinition of the problem as a conspiracy of anti-American elites.

1. It would be extraordinarily foolish to wait for a smoking gun before worrying about the possibility of a NAU emerging.

2. Those racial tensions aren't caused by a small number of commentors referring to an "invasion", but to the presence itself of the illegal aliens.

3. The elites trying to encourage the rest of us to think they're conspiring against us is the cover for what's in effect a conspiracy by the elites? Does that make sense to anyone else?

4. Needless to say, many of those on the right support "comprehensive immigration reform", something that would assist the elites and something that would make the situation even worse.

5. Those who support "free" trade are obviously quite willing to fluff up the pillows a bit; witness Barack Obama's proposals to slightly left-ify NAFTA, something that has no doubt been vetted as acceptable by those who support "free" trade. See, of course, his recent article in which, speaking in code, he came out in support of the SPP.

Posted to NAU at 11:38 PM

Alberta government removes NAFTA Superhighway map from their website

The Alberta, Canada government's Infrastructure and Transportation Department's website used to include a map showing the NAFTA Superhighway on an image of North America, designated as such. Now, the page with the map has been removed:

www.infratrans.gov.ab.ca/INFTRA_Content/docType56/Production/pol306.htm

Fortunately, you can see the map here, here, here, and here, as well as below:

5/28/08 UPDATE: I found another copy of the map here: infratrans.gov.ab.ca/2760.htm

Posted to NAU at 12:26 PM

Memo on Barack Obama senior advisor's meeting with Canadian government on NAFTA (Austan Goolsbee)

As previously discussed, Barack Obama senior economic policy advisor Austan Goolsbee discussed the candidate's position on NAFTA with Canadian government officials, supposedly letting them know that his anti-NAFTA statements were simply political posturing. Now, a Canadian government memo on the meeting has been released, despite previous denials of such a meeting having taken place. A roundup of the various Clintonian-style denials is here and here.

For instance, on February 29, Goolsbee said "It is a totally inaccurate story... I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office."

Now, let's turn to the memo:

"[Goolsbee] was frank in saying that the primary campaign has been necessarily domestically focused, particularly in the Midwest, and that much of the rhetoric that may be perceived to be protectionist is more reflective of political maneuvering than policy... On NAFTA, Goolsbee suggested that Obama is less about fundamentally changing the agreement and more in favour of strengthening/clarifying language on labour mobility and environment and trying to establish these as more 'core' principles of the agreement...

...Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign... He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Goolsbee, now admitting that the meeting took place, says they've mischaracterized his comments. There's certainly the possibility that he could be right: the Canadian government might be attempting to harm Obama's chances by releasing an inaccurate memo. That needs to be considered.

But, the fact that both Goolsbee and the Obama campaign haven't exactly been straightforward about this issue, and the fact that in general Obama is more or less a fake, carry more weight.

UPDATE: The tale of competing people who can't be trusted continues, as Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper says, "I certainly deny any allegation that this government has attempted to interfere in the American election". And, the Canadian Consulate says:

The Canadian Embassy and our Consulates General regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials. In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.

UPDATE 2: For perhaps the first time ever, the MSM has decided to ask Obama some tough questions. Why they'd start doing it now is unknown. However, he was asked not just about NAFTAGate but about his links to Tony Rezko as well, and it's now being presented as him "tangling" with the press who asked him a "barrage of questions" (link). There's video here.

UPDATE 3: A CBC report is here. Per the reporter, "the Canadian Embassy reviewed the diplomatic cable which was sent and acknowledges that they might have misrepresented the advisor". Who to trust?

UPDATE 4: "The Leader of Canada's New Democratic Party, Jack Layton, called today for the resignation of the Canadian Prime Minister's Chief of Staff over improper intervention in the US Democratic Primary race." The video here includes an unctuous reply from Stephen Harper.

Posted to Politics at 11:18 AM

Let's make a video for Barack Obama!

Here's the challenge: take the new will.i.am video in support of Barack Obama, you know, the really creepy one with the chanting and the braindead celebrities like Jessica Alba and others I have no hope of identifying telling us how Obama's going to save the environment and bring world peace just before he brings all of us a pony and a shiny new bicycle. You know, that one.

Then, replace or augment the soundtrack with Hare Krishna chanting (link, link), preferably one that's as absolutely annoying as possible, just chanting "Hare Krishna" over and over and over and over again. For extra points, mix in some sounds of other groups which are considered to be cults (just avoid that one, the you-know-what-I-mean-one, unless you want a snake in your mailbox). Maybe throw in a very light touch of marching (go easy on that, can't overdo it). Maybe reference The Comet with a brief image of black Nikes.

But, you've got to do it in a way that's tasteful. And, make sure you do it all legal like: adding a new soundtrack to the will.i.am video would probably be fair use, but taking good portions of content from one of those Hare Krishna videos would not be.

For extra credit, load the video on a laptop and play it over and over at full volume while asking for donations at your local airport.

Posted to WackyHumor at 10:30 PM

The Pentagon's Ray Gun meets 60 Minutes' stooge, David Martin

Tonight's 60 Minutes on CBS News had a segment from David Martin (cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3897986n) discussing a "ray gun" - some sort of directed energy beam - that the Pentagon is testing for possible use as a non-lethal weapon. I had previously seen a clip on Youtube (link), which only features the part where Martin is being subjected to its effects.

The full segment mostly concentrated - and in effect sold - its use as a weapon against protesters in foreign environments, mainly Iraq. It did discuss possible domestic use, but it didn't discuss any of the ramifications of that and whether domestic use of a weapon designed for the military is a threat to our civil liberties.

And, the full segment features something quite interesting that, had I been there, would have at least caused me to do a bit of a double-take. The part that shows the beam being tested on several "demonstrators" (presumably soldiers dressed as civilians) featured some interesting signs, such as "Love for All" and "World Peace".

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but "world peace" is probably not on too many "Rage Boy" signs, nor on those in Iraq, nor on those in other hot spots around the globe. In fact, about the only place you'd see a sign like that is in the U.S, Canada, Europe, and Australia/New Zealand. Those are generally the places where the protesters are the most peaceful and least likely to, for instance, use IEDs.

The idea for the signs had to have come from somewhere, indicating that using the "ray gun" against relatively peaceful domestic protesters or in other domestic situations is one of the goals, rather than simply using it in highly dangerous foreign situations. Obviously we're going to need someone besides a stooge like David Martin to look into that side of things.

Posted to ThePeaceMovement at 08:24 PM

Controversial Croatian Classical Guitar Playing Babe of the Week: Ana Vidovic

Team Lonewacko has selected Ana Vidovic as our Controversial Croatian Classical Guitar Playing Babe of the Week. And, yes, it would be even better if she would "go bf" (in the words of Team member Guillaume), but we takes what we gets:

Related:
Croatian Olympics Babe of the Day

Posted to WackyHumor at 12:51 PM

Beth Fouhy/AP shows bias in article complaining about media bias

Hillary Clinton supporter, San Francisco real estate developer, and Harvard center head Walter Shorenstein is complaining about pro-Barack Obama bias by the MSM. Beth Fouhy of the Associated Press writes (link):

..."I am absolutely outraged with the media coverage of the presidential campaign," Shorenstein wrote in the memo, which was obtained by The Associated Press. "This is the most important election in my long lifetime, and to quote one of my favorite movies, 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!'"

He was quoting the 1976 movie "Network," in which a mentally disturbed television news anchor played by Peter Finch went on the air and implored viewers to rebel against gimmicks staged by network news executives.

A search for Network "peter finch" "mentally disturbed" only turned up one relevant hit that I could see, and apparently his character was undergoing a nervous breakdown. Whatever the case, it's not really relevant to the reference, and it's perilously close to saying something like, "he said in a crazy way" or similar.

Posted to Politics at 06:14 PM

Deborah Howell, Washington Post ombudsman: WaPo immigration coverage mostly OK

Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell offers "Immigration Coverage in the Crossfire" (link):

Readers who oppose illegal immigration often complain that The Post has too much sympathy for those living in the United States illegally and too little for those who oppose this...

...A review of immigration stories, mostly local, over the past year and several months, showed that the coverage was mostly straightforward and informative...

Obvious to those who've seen my discussion of their articles, it's been anything but that. I've discussed dozens of WaPo immigration stories that were full of lies and/or misleading or incomplete statements. The latest example involved Joel Achenbach comparing those who oppose illegal immigration to the Nazis. Howell lauds N.C. Aizenman for another story, and discussing the flaws in that is left as an exercise. However, about a year ago he or she gushed over El Salvador's consul general. In January, Jonathan Weisman misled regarding Mike Huckabee's immigration stance. They printed a contributed article from Gary Jacobsen describing how to hire a day laborer. I could sit here for the rest of the day typing those in, but you get the point: Howell is misleading her readers just as badly as the WaPo's "reporters" do.

She does take the WaPo to task for some issues with their coverage, such as using "anti-immigrant" instead of "anti-illegal immigration". But, then she engages in something similar herself:

Have the views of those against illegal immigrants been fully told? My review included many stories quoting opponents -- as well as their march on the Mall. Some feel they've been portrayed as racist and xenophobic. While some have been quoted expressing views that might be interpreted that way, most have not. Halsey said it has been "very challenging to write effectively about people opposed to illegal immigration, because they are very passionate and seem suspicious of our motives and are less welcoming to our attention when we try to talk to them about their motivations."

While some or many opposed to illegal immigration might be "against illegal immigrants", others might not be opposed to them on a personal level, and Howell fails to make that distinction. It's also a very rare day when the WaPo questions the motivations of those who support illegal immigration; their too-left-even-for us report on Mexicanos Sin Fronteras might come close.

And, consider this:

On terminology, Chip Beck, a State Department officer and former U.S. consul, believes it's important to use "illegal alien." Beck, who said he was not speaking for the State Department, said, "Foreign nationals who come across the border without papers or who overstay their visa are deemed 'illegal aliens.' Those are the legally correct terms. . . . The correct terminology is not derogatory but carries precise meanings under law." He sent a copy of the federal law that says: "The term 'alien' means any person not a citizen or national of the United States."

The Post does not use "alien" in news stories and prefers "illegal immigrant." Even if "alien" is legal terminology, to me, it sounds like someone from outer space. "Undocumented workers" is also discouraged. The Post stylebook says of "undocumented": "When used to describe immigrants, this is a euphemism that obscures an important fact -- that they are in this country illegally."

As a commenter says at the article:

How dimwitted can you get? Is this the intellectual level the Post is running at? Did these people cover the Alien and Sedition Acts in 7th grade history?

Posted to Immigration2008a at 09:55 AM

Non-"liberal" coverage of immigration, Iraq, terrorism, multiculturalism, Los Angeles, California, privacy, and occasionally celebrities and wacky humor...

Main

Atom feed · RSS 2.0 feed · RSS 0.91 feed · WML

Immigration 2008a · Immigration 2007b · Immigration 2007a · Immigration · Immigration (6/05 to 12/05) · Immigration (1/05 to 6/05) · Immigration (8/04 to 12/04) · Immigration (before 8/04) · Immigration & Terrorism · Immigration & Driver's Licenses · Immigration & Consuls · Immigration & Media Bias · Immigration & Europe · North American Union

Blogging Across America

MultiCulti Madness · General Politics · Privacy · Miscellaneous · The "Peace" Movement

Los Angeles · California · Outdoors and sports · Celebrities · Wackiness · Inside Blogging

Iraq · Beltway Sniper · Terrorism & Extremism · The Saudis · Warblogging · War On Drugs

• 2008: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
• 2007: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2006: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2005: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2004: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2003: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2002: 9  10  11  12 

All Posts(links to each post by title)

• It's over: John McCain is our new president. I'm going on a holiday.
• Barack Obama wants national holiday for Cesar Chavez
• SPLC's "The Year in Hate" misled about FBI hate crime statistics
• Let's blame John McCain on Ann Althouse (bloggers helped McCain?)
• GPO outsourced "secure" passports to foreign countries; Chinese espionage
• The Evening Bleeding Knees Report for Saturday, March 29 2008
• Dolores Huerta says we can't enforce immigration laws, promotes demographic hegemony (ask Hillary Clinton)
• 10% of entire prison population are immigrants eligible for deportation
• House of Lords: immigration to Britain has had nearly zero economic benefit
• Treasury Dep't proposes consolidating Federal Reserve's power
• Secret tape of Arianna Huffington
• A Dream Deferred: Robert Greenwald/Brave New Films supports anti-American DREAM Act
• Doug Feaver will make you "hate" the Washington Post all over again (N.C. Aizenman)
• Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) endorses Barack Obama; a flashback
• McCain campaign dodges Juan Hernandez question; denies Heath Shuler charge
• Owen Gleiberman/Entertainment Weekly's movie review forgot something important
• Seven reasons Kos (DailyKos) can't be trusted on immigration (+Quinnipiac University poll)
• Arnold Schwarzenegger: don't blame illegal aliens for California budget woes
• Iraq paid for Jim McDermott/David Bonior/Mike Thompson trip?
• Saddam Hussein Iraq files: no assassination plot? No AQ links? No WTC1 links?

My trip to Alpine County What not to do, again (September 1-2, 2002)

Boston Market Cornbread Temperatures Please help contribute to this important study (August 28, 2002)

Did The Gap Put Celebrities at Risk? An Open Web Letter to The Gap (May 20, 2002)

Humphreys Peak Arizona's highest point (May 19, 2001)

Go Heavy, Go Slow, Get Lost Bay Area highpoints (December 14, 2000)

Hubris in New England The highpoints of RI, CT, and MA (October 8, 2000)

Let's go to Utah Zion, Bryce, and Grand Canyon (August 14, 2000)

Your host, climbing Monkey Face (5.14d)

Your host's arm (circled)

Your host's hopelessly outdated conditioning progress

BigMediaBlog.com : "Comments for sites that don't have comments."

BoreAmerica.com: monitoring Air America Radio

tolstoy.com : my business site

Drudge
The John and Ken Show (KFI-Los Angeles)
The Stein Report
Sam Zamarripa
RedState
Res Ipsa Loquitur
PCWatch
Natalie Merchant
Samizdata