Tuesday, July 6, 2010

WHO WILL FIGHT FOR THE UNEMPLOYED (LEGALS)? Not the Hispandering LA RAZA DEMS!

THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!

“We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers,” said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. “President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws.”


NEW YORK TIMES
June 29, 2010
Who Will Fight for the Unemployed?Without doubt, the two biggest threats to the economy are unemployment and the dire financial condition of the states, yet lawmakers have failed to deal intelligently with either one.

Federal unemployment benefits began to expire nearly a month ago. Since then, 1.2 million jobless workers have been cut off. The House passed a six-month extension as part of a broader spending bill in May, but the Senate, despite three attempts, has not been able to pass a similar bill. The majority leader, Harry Reid, said he was ready to give up after the third try last week when all of the Senate’s Republicans and a lone Democrat, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, blocked the bill.

Meanwhile, the states face a collective budget hole of some $112 billion, but neither the House nor the Senate has a plan to help. The House stripped a provision for $24 billion in state fiscal aid from its earlier spending bill. The Senate included state aid in its ill-fated bill to extend unemployment benefits; when that bill failed, the promise of aid vanished as well.

As a result, 30 states that had counted on the money to help balance their budgets will be forced to raise taxes even higher and to cut spending even deeper in the budget year that begins on July 1. That will only worsen unemployment, both among government workers and the states’ private contractors. Worsening unemployment means slower growth, or worse, renewed recession.

So if lawmakers are wondering why consumer confidence and the stock market are tanking (the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index hit a new low for the year on Tuesday), they need look no further than a mirror.

The situation cries out for policies to support economic growth — specifically jobless benefits and fiscal aid to states. But instead of delivering, Congressional Republicans and many Democrats have been asserting that the nation must act instead to cut the deficit. The debate has little to do with economic reality and everything to do with political posturing. A lot of lawmakers have concluded that the best way to keep their jobs is to pander to the nation’s new populist mood and play off the fears of the very Americans whose economic well-being Congress is threatening.

Deficits matter, but not more than economic recovery, and not more urgently than the economic survival of millions of Americans. A sane approach would couple near-term federal spending with a credible plan for deficit reduction — a mix of tax increases and spending cuts — as the economic recovery takes hold.

But today’s deficit hawks — many of whom eagerly participated in digging the deficit ever deeper during the George W. Bush years — are not interested in the sane approach. In the Senate, even as they blocked the extension of unemployment benefits, they succeeded in preserving a tax loophole that benefits wealthy money managers at private equity firms and other investment partnerships. They also derailed an effort to end widespread tax avoidance by owners of small businesses organized as S-corporations. If they are really so worried about the deficit, why balk at these evidently sensible ways to close tax loopholes and end tax avoidance?

House lawmakers made an effort on Tuesday to extend jobless benefits but failed to get the necessary votes, and it remains uncertain if an extension can pass both the House and Senate before Congress leaves town on Friday for a weeklong break. What’s needed, and what’s lacking, is leadership, both in Congress and from the White House, to set the terms of the debate — jobs before deficit reduction — and to fight for those terms, with failure not an option.

TERRORISM ON OUR OPEN & UNDEFENDED BORDERS

Borders' security threat

By JONATHAN GURWITZ

First published: Tuesday, July 6, 2010

The police chief of a town in a violent border region is found decapitated, his head in his lap, hours after gunmen with Kalashnikov rifles killed the deputy police chief and his bodyguard in a nearby municipality.
Assassins kill the leading candidate for governor in a neighboring border state. Military and intelligence forces respond to a credible threat to blow up a dam that, if successful, could flood an area with 4 million residents.

Iraq? Afghanistan? No -- Mexico in recent months, just across the Rio Grande from Texas. The police killings were in Nuevo Leon, the assassination in Tamaulipas, and the dam was at Falcon Lake, straddling the border between Tamaulipas and Starr County, Texas.

Too often, discussions about the border, including President Barack Obama's address on July 1, devolve into the passionate debate about immigration. That debate and the emotions it engenders tend to obscure a more fundamental issue: Our nation's porous border is a threat to U.S. national security.

Migrants from Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America who come here to pick crops, wash dishes and clean houses don't represent a fifth column of foreign invaders. They are people looking for better lives, discouraged from seeking legal entry by an immigration system that stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the powerful current created when the world's wealthiest nation shares a 2,000-mile border with a developing nation.

But here's an inescapable truth. The same routes and crossing points, the same coyotes and smugglers manual laborers rely on to enter the United States, can also be used by intruders with far less benign objectives.

The most obvious examples are the drug cartels battling each other and the Mexican government for control of lucrative trafficking routes into the U. S.

The cartels, their paramilitary enforcers and street gangs move illicit drugs north and cash and guns back south. In the multi-billion-dollar drug trade, the border is irrelevant. And there's no reason to believe the people doing the beheadings and assassinations will indefinitely be solicitous about keeping violence on one side of an international boundary, as the alleged dam plot suggests.

There are some less obvious examples: In May, the Department of Homeland Security warned law enforcement officials in Texas of the potential illegal entry from Mexico of a suspected member of the al-Shabaab terrorist group, an al-Qaida affiliate in Somalia.

Why would terrorists from Somalia or anywhere else choose to clandestinely enter the United States from Mexico? Because if millions of Mexican laborers can do it, so can they.

That's the troubling fact at the heart of what the U.S. government calls "special interest aliens": illegal immigrants from countries that pose a national security threat. Hundreds of them are apprehended in the United States each year. No one knows how many are being missed.

A recent report from the U.S. Southern Command obtained by the Washington Examiner raises a warning flag.

"Of particular concern is the smuggling of criminal aliens and gang members who pose public safety threats to communities throughout the border region and the country," it cautions. "These individuals include hundreds of undocumented aliens from special interest countries, primarily China, but also Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan."

People who wish to do harm to the United States can and are entering the country undetected. That ought to be the starting point of any national discussion about the border.

Jonathan Gurwitz writes for the San Antonio Express-News. His e-mail address is jgurwitz@express-news.net.

AMERICAN MAY NEVER BE THE SAME....Heard English Today?

Published on The New Republic (http://www.tnr.com)

America May Never Be the Same

William Galston

July 2, 2010

The just-released report from the Pew Research Center, “How the Great Recession Has Changed Life in America,” is probably the most searching investigation of this question produced so far. Although some of the top-line findings have circulated widely, some of the less-noticed details are just as significant. Taken as a whole, the report suggests that the Great Recession will have a more-than-transitory effect on the outlook and psychology of most Americans, with significant consequences for our economy and society. Some key items:

•Not surprisingly, nearly half of all homeowners report a decline in the value of their homes during the recession. What is surprising is how long they think it will take for prices to recover: about half estimate three to five years; about 40 percent expect it will take six years or longer. And because homes constitute the dominant part of middle class households’ net worth, this helps explain why these families think it will be quite some time before their overall financial condition returns to its pre-recession peak. Forty percent estimate three to five years, 13 percent six to ten years, and 10 percent longer than ten years (or never).

•While it is true, as Stephen Rose has recently argued, that the net worth of U.S. households increased during recent decades despite record levels of debt accumulation, it is also true that upper-income households captured most of the gains. The Federal Reserve conducts a triennial survey of family finances, of which the most recent was completed at the end of 2007. From 1998 to 2007, the median net worth of all families increased by a modest $29 thousand, from $91 to $120 thousand. But mean net worth increased by almost $197 thousand, demonstrating the concentration of gains at the top. From other sources we know that overall household net worth declined by nearly 20 percent during the current recession, erasing the decade of modest gains for households at the median. And the Pew report provides evidence that middle-class families were hit harder than those in the upper tier. Among the top 20 percent, almost as many households report being better off as worse off since the onset of the recession. Among middle-class households, 45 percent report being worse off, versus only 21 percent who say they are better off.

•We already knew that long-term unemployment is the worst it has been since the end of the Great Depression. But the Pew report dramatizes just how bad it is. During what was previously the worst recession since the 1930s (1981-82), the median duration of unemployment peaked at 12.3 weeks. In May of this year, the median duration was almost twice as high: 23.2 weeks. Today, 46 percent of all unemployed workers have been out of work for more than six months, versus 26 percent at the height of the Reagan recession.

•The effects of the Great Recession on the labor market extend beyond unemployment. In 1999, the share of the working-age population that is working (the “employment rate”) peaked above 64 percent. In 2007, just before the current downturn, it stood at 63.3 percent. By this May, it had declined by a stunning 4.8 percent points, to 58.5 percent. (By contrast, the Reagan-era recession produced a decline of 2.9 percent points.) Today’s employment rate stands where it was in 1985, erasing a quarter-century of gains.

•While this recession has been bad for everyone, it has been a catastrophe for men. In the fourth quarter of 2007, male and female unemployment rates were almost identical, at a bit under 5 percent. By the end of 2009, the rate for women was 8.7 percent–but for men it was 11.2 percent. (In the male-dominated construction sector, the unemployment rate surged from 7 percent to 20 percent.)

•Most of the jobs lost during the current recession aren’t coming back. Fifty-two percent of currently unemployed workers lost their jobs for reasons other than temporary layoffs—a far higher share than in any other postwar downturn. This is not a cyclical downturn in the labor market. Returning to full unemployment will require many millions of new jobs in companies and even sectors that do not yet exist.

•More than six in ten Americans report having cut back on spending since the recession began, and many expect this to continue after it ends. Pew finds similar patterns of behavior and expectation in the areas of borrowing and saving as well. It’s easy to forget that as recently as 1970 through 1985, household savings averaged 10 percent of disposable income. In the next two decades, the savings rate decline to almost zero before increasing modestly to about 4 percent by 2009. There’s a good reason to believe that this number will continue to increase: only 23 percent of workers say that they are very confident that they’ll have enough income and assets for retirement, versus 32 percent who report little or no confidence.

•Among workers ages 50 to 61 who are currently employed, 60 percent say that they may have to delay retirement, as do even more--69 percent--of workers in this age group with incomes between $30 and $75 thousand. Young adults are already experiencing great difficulty finding jobs and starting careers; in a sluggish labor market, later retirements could make a tough situation even worse.

Despite all this, Americans remain congenitally optimistic: 62 percent expect their financial situation to improve over the next year; 61 percent believe that the damage the recession has inflicted on the economy will turn out to be temporary rather than permanent; 63 percent endorse the proposition that, “America will always continue to be prosperous and make economic progress.”

But there are signs of doubt as well. As recently as 2002, 61 percent thought their children’s standard of living would be better than their own; only 10 percent thought it would be worse. Today, the optimists’ share has declined to 45 percent, while pessimists now constitute fully 26 percent of the population. And doubt tends to reinforce caution. We don’t have enough evidence to conclude that the Great Recession will generate the kind of long-lasting risk aversion that characterized the Depression-era generation throughout their lives. But we do have reason to believe that for some time to come, what Keynes famously called “animal spirits” will remain subdued, which suggests that we’re in for a slow recovery and historically high levels of unemployment for much of this decade. If the Pew report is on target, the “new normal” will be more than a slogan.
A

IS THE AMERICAN DREAM DEAD, OR JUST HANDED OVER TO ILLEGALS WITH OUR JOBS?

July 6, 2010

HUFFPOST 7-6-2010

Richard (RJ) Eskow.Consultant, Writer, Policy Analyst


The War For Financial Independence: The Call to Surrender

There's a new conventional wisdom forming in Washington, DC this July 4th, one that transcends party lines and the usual classifications of "left" and "right" as they're understood in that city. It's only being recognized now, because it deals with a number of different economic issues, but the underlying theme is the same: The American dream of financial independence and security is gone. The sooner you accept that and raise the white flag the easier it will be, so stop struggling.

Theyre saying the ideal of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is dead. Deal with it.

Why, there hasn't been this much unanimity among Washington elites since - well, since they "knew" there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Here's what they "know" now: The United States is doomed to a future of staggeringly high unemployment. Social Security is part of our national deficit and, like that notorious village in Vietnam, we need to destroy it in order to save it. And we must face an open-ended future where the public treasury and personal security are held hostage to the whims of a few "too big to fail" banks.

Some of these "conventional wisdoms" have been around for years, while others are forming as we speak. Most of them began as politically partisan ideas, but have only been Sacred Truths for a few months. Yet they're already acquiring the false gravitas of ancient received wisdoms. What's the common thread behind these three ideas? They provide a rationale for not resisting the enormous political influence of corporations and wealthy Americans.

The last few days - ironically, those that led up to our celebration of Independence - saw a sudden rash of white-flag declarations. This latest wave of surrender demands involves joblessness. First Digby noted that Jonathan Alter said the following in an interview with Chris Hayes on the "Ed Show" : "We are going to have to accustom ourselves to some higher than, you know, old normal percentage of unemployment. You know, I don't know whether it's seven percent, six percent, whatever."

Before the viewer could utter a Scooby Doo "ruh-roh," The New Republic published a piece by William Galson called "America Will Never Be the Same." In reviewing a Pew study's findings on the Great Recession's impact, Galston writes: "... (W)e do have reason to believe that ... we're in for a slow recovery and historically high levels of unemployment for much of this decade." And, as if on cue, CNN Money published an piece called "7.9 million jobs lost - many forever."

In an article entitled "Spend or Scrimp? Two Sides in a White House Debate," we learned this week that those in the White House who are "focused on deficits - or at least on positioning Mr. Obama to show his concern -- are his chief strategist, David Axelrod, other political advisers and Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, according to Democrats."

Axelrod says, "it's my job to report what the public mood is," as if the President were merely a passive observer of public opinion and not a potential shaper. Adds Axelrod, "I've made the point that as a matter of policy and a matter of politics that we need to focus on (deficits)." And what better way to erode resistance to that approach than by building a consensus among friendly liberals? The new consensus view: It's impossible to provide the sorts of stimulus that would be needed to address high unemployment, so "we" (by which is meant the jobless - not "we" at all) have to accept it.

Am I suggesting a White House-led conspiracy to undermine stimulus thinking? No. The White House understands that some stimulus will be needed. As with most such consensus thinking, "a conspiracy of shared values" is more than enough. And, as with all Washington trends, a "consensus" is formed by persuading liberals to adopt right-wing ideas, not the other way around. "We'd all love to bring unemployment down," the thinking goes, "but it's just not going to happen."

Let's be clear: Every American who is condemned to long-term unemployment has been shut out of the American dream. When DC insiders encourage us to accept that fixing the problem is too politically challenging, they're telling us that we as a nation must accept profound economic misery for millions of our fellow citizens.

They're also telling us to accept a more racially-divided nation, with a race-based gap in unemployment so severe that it could rightfully be called "jobs apartheid." When African American unemployment is virtually double that of whites and we're asked to accept that structural unemployment is here to stay, we're being told that Martin Luther King's dream of economic equality between the races is one we can no longer afford.

Bear in mind, there has been no NAFTA-like change in the US job situation to explain these new unemployment figures. The Great Recession, not outsourcing, took this last wave of jobs. Why can't we work to rebuild our economy on a firmer foundation and get many of those jobs back? The answer comes, in large part, because of fear of what Paul Krugman calls the "invisible bond vigilantes." The fear - or the stated fear - is these bogeymen will make sure that bond markets don't invest in the United States unless we slash government spending. (As Krugman points out, the "wisdom of the market" says they like our government's actions just fine, but that's apparently beside the point.)

Cui bono - who benefits? One can only speculate. If a government that has spent trillions to rescue the banking industry now spends billions to get people back to work, that could result in a drive for greater taxation of those who benefited from the bank bailout. The same with the new "bipartisan" assault on Social Security. Social Security's minor long-term financial problems could easily be fixed by raising the contribution levels. But that would render it politically immune to being used as a piggy bank for fixing tax-cut-driven deficits. They want to use it as a regressive tax on middle-class earnings instead. What's more, cuts to Social Security would drive more people to invest their savings with the very banks that created that deficit - a double win for Wall Street.

Banking interests are one reason there's been little support so far for economist Robert H. Frank's proposal - a program that restructures consumer debt through direct Federal loans to credit card holders buried by what they owe. Morally, it's no different than the bank bailout. The benefits for the overall economy (in increased spending) would be immediate and real. But the right people don't benefit so it hasn't become part of the Washington consensus.

Americans need jobs, and jobs would benefit the economy. Social Security is one of the most stable government programs we have. And Federal actions should benefit the entire economy and its participants, not just a few wealthy bankers. These are the kinds of truths our nation's founders once called "self-evident."

In the halls of government nowadays, unfortunately, self-evident truths aren't what they used to be.
_______________________________________________________________

Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer (and former insurance/finance executive), is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard also blogs at A Night Light.

He can be reached at "rjeskow@ourfuture.org."

Website: Eskow and Associates

SOARING UNEMPLOYMENT - SOARING INVASION OF 38 MILLION ILLEGALS - How'd That Happen???

THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!

“We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers,” said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. “President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws.”



MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE GENEROUS DONORS TO LA RAZA – THE MEXICAN FASCIST POLITICAL PARTY. THESE FIGURES ARE DATE. CNN CALCULATES THAT WAGES ARE DEPRESSED $300 - $400 BILLION PER YEAR!

“The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.” Christian Science Monitor
*
OBAMA’S LONG HISTORY OF HISPANDERING….
Lou Dobbs Tonight
CNN -- July 27 Pilgrim: Well presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama voiced support for yesterday's court ruling that struck down Hazleton's illegal immigration law. Senator Obama called the federal court ruling a victory for all Americans. The senator said comprehensive reform is needed so local communities do not continue to take matters into their own hands. Senator Obama was a supporter of the Senate's failed immigration bill, which would have given amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney took a strong stand against chain migration today....

The unemployment emergency
By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, July 6, 2010; A13
The good news is that unemployment has fallen to "only" 9.5 percent. The bad news is that the jobless rate is down only because so many people have given up hope of finding work. Perversely, the jobless who aren't actively looking for jobs are not counted as "unemployed." Perhaps there should be a new category: "mired in existential despair." If anyone in Washington wants to know why people in the hinterlands are angry, one simple answer is that our political leaders seem to be so calculating and unmoved about the parlous state of the economy.
The disheartening employment figures released Friday quickly became fodder for the kind of political to-and-fro that has become standard operating procedure. President Obama quickly put his spin on the numbers, noting that the private sector added 83,000 jobs in June. The president's Republican opponents noted that overall, the economy lost 125,000 jobs -- taking into account not just the private-sector gain but the end of 225,000 temporary jobs for census workers.
Last month, it was the other way around. The overall number, showing what happened in May, indicated a healthy-looking gain in jobs -- so that was what Obama wanted to talk about. But the increase reflected mostly census hiring, with the private sector adding a paltry 41,000 jobs -- which was the number the Republicans wanted to highlight.
All the spinning and counterspinning drives people crazy. And why shouldn't it? The employment numbers aren't just a monthly set of partisan talking points. They represent actual lives. They represent mortgages that might not be paid and college educations that have to be deferred; they tally mental health crises and broken marriages. Those sterile, emotionless figures speak of pain and anxiety. They mock our faith in the American dream.
Let me put it in terms that Washington understands: The party that begins to treat the unemployment crisis with the hair-on-fire urgency that it deserves is the party that will do well in November.
In the past, a steep fall into recession has often led to an equally steep climb back to prosperity. Clearly, that's not the case this time. In relatively short order, the economy lost about 7 million jobs. So far this year, we've gained back more than 600,000 -- not bad, given that in early 2009 we were shedding that many jobs each month, but not nearly enough to have the kind of impact the nation can really feel.
The debate among economists about whether or not this will prove to be a "double-dip" recession is beside the point. For most people, this feels more like one long, uninterrupted dip -- with no end in sight. Adding 83,000 private-sector jobs in June sounds like something of an accomplishment, until you realize that the U.S. economy has to add more than 125,000 jobs a month just to accommodate the natural growth of the workforce. With a gain of 83,000 jobs, we actually lost ground.
Our political leaders know that unemployment is on their constituents' minds, so they talk about it. A lot. But we're not seeing either party show the kind of courage that's really needed.
Republicans block an extension of unemployment benefits, rail about the deficit and complain that Democrats don't understand that economic renewal will come when the private sector is unleashed. The problem is that since Republicans are in the minority, they have to work with the Democrats to get anything done. I suspect that their strategy -- standing on the sidelines and yelling, "The Democrats are doing it all wrong!" -- will not win as much favor from voters as the GOP hopes.
Democrats, on the other hand, do have the power to enact an agenda. But individual members of Congress act as if they are more concerned about their own electoral prospects than about bringing those unemployment numbers down. If a second economic stimulus is the answer, then that's what Democrats should do. If the answer is something else, fine. But they should know that whether they call themselves progressives or Blue Dogs or whatever, voters see them as one party and will hold them accountable.
Washington gets all excited when someone commits an embarrassing or impolitic gaffe. Beyond the Beltway, people cannot understand why our leaders can't be similarly focused and energetic about the most tragic spasm of economic dislocation in eight decades.
The writer will be online to chat with readers at 1 p.m. Eastern time Tuesday. Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.

Hispandering Obama's ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS - No Wonder His Jobs Plan is Called AMNESTY!

OBAMA’S NEWEST SCAM – ALL PART OF THE LA RAZA DEMS’ ENDLESS BIT BY BIT BY BIT AMNESTY, WHICH IS HOW WE GOT 38 MILLION ILLEGALS IN THIS NATION!

THE FEDS DEMAND OPEN BORDERS, REFUSE TO ENFORCE EXISTING LAWS AGAINST HIRING ILLEGALS, THEN ALSO REFUSE TO PAY STATES FOR THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION, WELFARE AND PRISON SYSTEMS!

IN MEXIFORNIA, NOW IN MELTDOWN DUE IN LARGE PART TO THE MEX OCCUPATION, THE STATE PAYS ONE BILLION TO INCARCERATE ILLEGAL MEXICAN CRIMINALS. THE FEDS RETURN LESS THAN 10% OF THAT. THE REST COMES FROM SCHOOLS, ROADS, BRIDGES.

ALL THAT “CHEAP” MEXICAN LABOR WASHINGTON, AND ITS CORPORATE MASTERS DEMAND, IS STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE!



the state's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives,


Justice Dept. expected to sue Ariz. on immigration, citing 'preemption' grounds
By Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 6, 2010; A02
The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, law enforcement sources said Monday.
The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption," which is based on the Constitution's supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.
A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton first revealed last month that the Justice Department intended to sue Arizona, and department lawyers have been preparing their case, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the government has not announced its plans. The filing is expected to include declarations from other U.S. agencies saying that the Arizona law would place a undue burden on their ability to enforce immigration laws nationwide, because Arizona police are expected to refer so many illegal immigrants to federal authorities.
The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.
But lawyers who helped draft the Arizona legislation have expressed doubt that a preemption argument would prevail. The law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April, is scheduled to take effect later this month.

WHICH ASSAULTS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF ARIZONA MORE? Hispandering Obama or the MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS?

Justice Dept. expected to sue Ariz. on immigration, citing 'preemption' grounds

By Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 6, 2010; A02



The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, law enforcement sources said Monday.

The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption," which is based on the Constitution's supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton first revealed last month that the Justice Department intended to sue Arizona, and department lawyers have been preparing their case, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the government has not announced its plans. The filing is expected to include declarations from other U.S. agencies saying that the Arizona law would place a undue burden on their ability to enforce immigration laws nationwide, because Arizona police are expected to refer so many illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.

But lawyers who helped draft the Arizona legislation have expressed doubt that a preemption argument would prevail. The law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April, is scheduled to take effect later this month.

MEXIFORNIA... Who Really Pays For the Mexican Welfare & Prison State?

WHO REALLY PAYS FOR THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION AND WELFARE/PRISON STATE???

YOU DO!

CA IS IN MELTDOWN, DUE IN PART TO THE EVER EXPANDING MEXICAN WELFARE AND PRISON SYSTEMS.

THE STATE PAYS OUT $20 BILLION A YEAR IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS! ONE BILLION ALONE JUST TO COVER ILLEGAL CRIMINALS IN STATE OPERATED PRISIONS!

LOS ANGELES COUNTY PAYS OUT $600 MILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS!

WHERE DOES THIS MONEY COME FROM?

YOU WONDERED WHY CA SCHOOL SYSTEMS ARE THE WORST IN THE UNION?

HERE'S A FEW OTHER EXAMPLES OF WHERE THE MONEY COMES FROM....


California pension system seeks $700 million in state funds

By Kevin Martinez

6 July 2010

On June 17, the board of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), the largest pension fund in the US, voted to seek an extra $700 million from taxpayer funds and 1,000 school districts. The increase, beginning this month, comes at a time when the state faces a $19.1 billion deficit and would raise the state’s contribution to CalPERS to $3.9 billion.

State pensions throughout the US are underfunded. The entire political establishment—the Democrats, the Republicans, and the trade unions—are in agreement that the long term strategy is to cut pension benefits.

As CalPERS seeks more assistance from the state to meet its pension obligations, it is the working class once again that will be forced to foot the bill for the financial aristocracy. Many state and municipal governments, already facing their own bankruptcy, will see their contributions go up even more. Meanwhile, school districts, many of which are being systematically dismantled, are being asked to give even more.

CalPERS, which oversees the retirement pensions of more than 1.3 million state workers, retirees, and their families, saw its $204 billion fund lose $56.2 billion in the value of its investments, a 24-percent drop from last year. The primary reason for this is due to the investments made in the volatile real-estate, bonds, commodities and private equity markets during the 2008-2009 financial collapse. At the same time, more state workers are living longer and retiring sooner. Both have proven to be a problem for the pension fund to meet its obligations.

The $700 million additional funds would increase employer contributions from the state and school districts, to about $5 billion in 2010-2011. The proposed boost would “only” cost the state’s general fund $184 million more than the current year, according to the state’s legislative analyst’s office.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger supports CalPERS’ request from the state as he seeks to create a two-tier system that would cut the state’s pension costs. Under Schwarzenegger’s plan, older workers would be allowed to keep the pensions they were guaranteed, while newer workers would receive reduced benefits. This would include rolling back pension benefits adopted in 1999 for new hires, a permanent 5 percent increase in employer contributions, and readjusting the retirement rate so that it is based on the average of the three highest years of wages instead of the highest single year.

State Senator Bob Dutton, a Republican from San Bernardino and Riverside counties, told The Contra Costa Times, “Public pensions have become very generous, and not only that, but unsupportable.”

In fact, the average pension retirement check is a mere $25,000 a year. Retirees on average receive little more than $2,000 a month in benefits, which means cutting these meager checks for newer workers would be condemning them to outright poverty.

The main reason pensions are low is because wages are low. Although public sector employees are portrayed as over-compensated, the vast majority of retirees are forced to live on inadequate means. In 2005, the average CalPERS monthly benefit was $1,673.82, an amount that falls far short of the high cost of living in the state.

Schwarzenegger is currently negotiating with 19 of 21 public sector unions to bring down pension costs. The governor has already collaborated with four public sector unions representing 23,000 workers to drastically reduce their state pensions. The California Association of Highway Patrolmen (CAHP), the California Department of Forestry Firefighters (CDFF), the California Association of Psychiatric Technicians (CAPT) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) have all agreed to a 5-year increase to the minimum retirement age, and a 10-percent hike in employee contributions.

Union officials told The Los Angeles Times that they did not “relish” the pension cuts, but cooperated in sacrificing their rank-and-files because of the state’s financial crisis. The financial elite are counting on the unions to implement their assault on public pensions. John Ross, executive director of the California Budget Project (a think tank specializing in fiscal and policy analysis as well as public education), told The Contra Costa Times that the governor should not issue ultimatums to the legislature to reduce benefits when “a collective bargaining process seems to be an appropriate way to deal with this issue.”

CalPERS is by no means alone in its budget woes. In a study by researchers Robert Novy-Marx and Joshua Rauh of the National Bureau of Economic Research, state pensions are undercapitalized by $3.12 trillion, assuming the systems were to meet all their pension obligations. An April study released by Stanford University’s School of Public Policy also shows that California’s three biggest pensions face a combined shortfall of $500 billion in pension obligations.

Stanford’s Institute for Economic Policy Research questioned whether the $700 million request will be enough for CalPERS to meet the 75 percent of every pension dollar needed to cover existing liabilities, stating, “There is less than a 20 percent likelihood that Calpers’ investment returns are sufficient to pay for all existing pension obligations.”

Politically, the $700 million request comes at an embarrassing time for CalPERS, which has seen many of its top board members accused of financial crimes. One former board member, Alfred Villalobos, Jr., is being investigated by the state attorney general and the US Securities and Exchange Commission for accepting bribes from well-connected private equity and real estate managers in exchange for multi-million dollar investments from CalPERS.

*

California Governor outlines new budget austerity program
By Dan Conway
17 May 2010
On Friday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger delivered his “May Budget Revise”, setting guidelines for the state legislature to address the state’s budget deficit prior to the start of the next fiscal year on July 1.


Schwarzenegger’s plans involve, in his own words, “absolutely terrible cuts” to vulnerable sections of the poor and working class. The Governor’s proposals include the complete elimination of the state’s Welfare to Work program, which provides monthly payments of $694 to unemployed individuals who participate in job training programs. The program’s elimination will affect 1.4 million people, approximately two-thirds of whom are children.


In addition to the $1.1 billion to be gained through the elimination of CalWorks, Schwarzenegger hopes to make reductions in the following areas:


* $750 million in cuts to the state’s In Home Support Services program (IHSS) which provides a minimal level of funding to allow poorer residents to take care of disabled family members.

* $532 million is to be cut from the state’s Medi-Cal program providing health care assistance to the unemployed and indigent. The funding will be reduced by reducing eligibility, limiting doctor’s visits to ten per year, reducing funding for hearing aids and other medical equipment and by increasing co-pays.

* $602 million is to be cut from the state’s Food Stamp Program.

* An overall funding cut of sixty percent to state-provided mental health programs.

* $15 million is to be cut from the Healthy Families program which provides medical assistance to nearly 700,000 thousand children from low-income families.

* $1.2 billion from the state’s prison system by cutting funds to inmate health care and shifting a portion of the state inmate population to county, rather than state jails.

* $1.6 billion to be gained through a five percent reduction in the overall state payroll along with five percent wage cuts for every individual state worker to pay five percent increases in pension contributions. The overall 15 percent cut will replace the three unpaid furlough days per month which workers are currently required to take, however Schwarzenegger’s ‘s proposal also includes a new one-day-per-month furlough, raising the overall effective pay cut for state workers to approximately 20 percent.

* A funding freeze on public education including for K-12, community colleges and universities system.


The Governor ‘s plan, which reduces spending by $12.4 billion, also depends on the receipt of $3.4 billion in federal funds along with $3.3 billion from other sources, including the hoped-for sale of 24 state office buildings and revenues gained through the raiding of various local funding sources.


Schwarzenegger’s last proposal to deal with the state’s now $19 billion deficit was delivered last January. The current proposals are very much in line with what Schwarzenegger promised then. If, the governor said, $6.4 billion of federal aid to assist with the state’s deficit reduction efforts was not forthcoming, he would push for the elimination of those programs which are now on the chopping block, including CalWorks IHSS and the Healthy Families program. (See: “California Governor Schwarzenegger promises billions more in cuts”)


In contrast to his earlier plan however, the Governor is no longer proposing the early release of prison inmates incarcerated for non-violent offenses.


The Obama administration, for its part, has rejected out-of-hand any financial support for the state. Washington reasons that providing aid to the state, however minimal, would set a dangerous precedent for all the other states in the country experiencing massive shortfalls of their own. Similar reasoning, needless to say, was not employed when the large banks, which precipitated the collapse of the US and international financial markets, asked for multi-billion dollar bailouts from the government.


California, however, does hope to gain approximately $3 billion in increased federal contributions to the state’s Medi-Cal program by waiving various regulations currently required by law. The increased contribution, however, is contingent upon federal approval of Medi-Cal service waivers along with the imposition of quality assurance fees on hospitals and clinics offering such services.


Aside from the relatively modest federal aid and massive spending cuts, the Governor’s budget proposals include no meaningful sources of revenue except for the increased enforcement of traffic violation penalties, along with plans to modernize and increase participation in the state’s lottery system. Should the legislature, and later on state voters, approve the Governor’s lottery plan, his office estimates that it would bring in an additional $15 billion in revenue over the next three years.


Moreover, Schwarzenegger has made it clear that whatever new revenues are to be gained through these mechanisms will not be used to restore funding to social programs but instead will be placed into a “rainy day” fund. The has pledged that the measure would help the state avoid what is being called a “feast or famine cycle” wherein the state supposedly spends irresponsibly on social programs and infrastructure during years of budget surplus and thus finds it necessary to eliminate or cut from these programs once the economy sours.


What the imposition of a rainy day fund represents, therefore, is an attempt to establish the permanence of budget cuts and austerity.


While Schwarzenegger has publicly lamented having to make cuts to social programs, he has repeatedly claimed that such cutting is required for the state to “live within its means.”


The Governor reiterated his position in a question and answer session last Friday in the following exchange with a reporter.


Question: “Governor, you said you would be seeking additional cuts in Health and Human Services. And I’m wondering, how do you justify that when the economy is not doing well and the demand for government programs is going up?”


Schwarzenegger replied: “Well, I think that you said it. Because the economy is not doing well and because we have a broken budget system we don’t have more money. We have to live within our means. That’s what I need to do in my business, that’s what I need to do in my family We have to live within our means.”


For Schwarzenegger, living within his means apparently involves commuting to work every morning in his own private jet.


The Governor continued, “Everyone has to tighten their belts. Local government has to tighten their belts, we have to tighten our belts. We have to recognize there’s only so much money.”


Schwarzenegger also likened the situation facing California to that facing Greece, Ireland Spain and other countries enacting austerity measures. “You see what is happening in Greece, you see what is happening in Ireland, you see what is happening in Spain now. And everyone has to go and look at it and say we’ve got to go and come to the realization that we can’t continue spending money and promise people things that we can’t keep. That’s all the revenues we have.”


As in Greece, Ireland and Spain, working people in California are being made to suffer for a crisis which is not of their making. Also, as in those countries, the wealth of the richest one percent of the population is to remain completely inviolate.


The Democrats in Sacramento, for their part, have made use of the absence of actual budget negotiations to denounce the Schwarzenegger ‘s plans, using oppositional-sounding rhetoric which costs them nothing. According to State Senate President Darrel Steinberg, “The cuts are absolutely unacceptable.” Senator Denise Ducheny of San Diego said that under the Governor’s plan, “children have no value, but corporate tax breaks that do not exist today have greater value than the children of California.”


There can be no doubt however, that the state Democrats will, in the end, fully agree to massive austerity measures in one form or another. The Democrats, no less than the Republicans, represent the interests of the financial elite who demand further sacrifice from the broad masses of the population.


Whatever the outcome of the budget negotiations this summer, the measures ultimately passed will involve massive attacks on their living standards will not be reversed.


The most urgent and pressing task facing the working people in California is the formation of their own independent organizations to fight these cutbacks and unite their struggles with those of workers across the US and internationally. The Socialist Equality Party calls for the independent political mobilization of working people to oppose wage cuts, layoffs and the on-going decimation of social services. Above all, workers should contact the Socialist Equality Party to begin the process of fighting back against these austerity measures.

ARE ILLEGALS VOTING? You Thought There Was One Law They Didn't Break? FASTEST GROWING PARTY IS LA RAZA "THE RACE"!!!

ARE ILLEGALS VOTING? YOU’RE A FOOL IF YOU THOUGHT THEY WEREN’T!

ILLEGALS ARE VOTING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, HENCE THE “LATINO VOTE”. THE FASTEST GROWING POLITICAL FORCE IN THIS NATION IS LA RAZA “THE RACE” THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA FOR MEX SUPREMACY!!!

THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT STATES WITH A POPULATION GREATER THAN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, WHERE 47% OF THOSE WITH A JOB ARE ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS….IF YOU THOUGHT ILLEGALS STOPPED BREAKING OUR LAWS AFTER THEY HOPPED OUR BORDER! HARDLY!
BOTH LA RAZA DEMS FEINSTEIN AND BOXER PUSHED HARD FOR NO I.D. TO VOTE, AND NO ENGLISH ONLY TO ACCOMMODATE OUR OCCUPIERS THAT HAVE CONTEMPT FOR THE GRINGOS’ LANGUAGE.

SOUTHERN CA HAS FOUR LA RAZA RACIST PARTY MEMBERS IN CONGRESS (NOW ABOUT ONE-QUARTER OF THE HOUSE ARE LA RAZA. THEY ARE THE HISPANIC CAUCUS) THESE ARE Rep. XAVIER BECERRA, A RABIDLY RACIST MEX. JUDICIAL WATCH REPORTED THAT JOURNALIST CAUGHT BECERRA SITTING ON HIS ASS WHEN THE NATION ANTHEM WAS BEING PLAYED. WHEN ASKED WHY, BECERRA LAUGHED IN THE JOURNALIST’S FACE. JOE BACA, OF MEX INFESTED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, IS AN OUTSPOKEN “RECONQUISTA” LA RAZA MEMBER. HIS DISTRICT HAS SOARING WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS (GRINGOS, NOT NARCOMEX PAY) AND THE USUAL INFESTATION OF HIGHLY VIOLENT MEXICAN GANGS. IN ORANGE COUNTY THERE ARE TWO Reps. THAT ARE LA RAZA. SISTERS LORETTA AND LINDA SANCHEZ, OPENLY CONDEMN ARIZONA’ ATTEMPT TO PROTECT ITSELF FROM THE MEXICAN INVASION AND WELFARE CRIME STATE, WERE BOTH ELECTED WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.

S.F. GATE REPORTED THAT AT A CINCO DE MAYO, OUR NEXT NATIONAL HOLIDAY, ILLEGALS WERE QUOTED AS SAYING THEY WOULD NOT AGAIN VOTE FOR OBAMA IF HE DIDN’T GRANT AMNESTY!.... LAWS DON’T APPLY TO ILLEGALS! THEY KNOW IT, AND THE LA RAZA DEMS DO ALSO!

latimes.com

Turning anger on immigration law into votes
Activists in Arizona hope increasing voter turnout among Latinos will reshape the state's policies; it's a campaign that worked in California in the 1990s.

By Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times

July 6, 2010
Reporting from Phoenix


Rafael Robles has been eligible to vote ever since he became a U.S. citizen 23 years ago, but nothing has spurred him to register until two young activists visited his house here last week.

The canvassers were part of an ambitious push to increase turnout of Latino voters in the wake of a controversial state law that requires police to determine the immigration status of people they legally stop and suspect are in the country illegally.

Robles, 60, recounted how his 39-year-old daughter, a Phoenix native, has been stopped multiple times by officers who ask her in broken Spanish where she was born.

"It's only because she is Hispanic," Robles said as he filled out a form to become a voter. He noted how, in decades past, signs were posted at establishments across the Southwest saying no dogs or Mexicans were allowed.

"It can all return," he said.

Activists hope that SB 1070, which Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law in April and is scheduled to take effect July 29, will generate enough angry new Latino voters like Robles to reshape this state's hard-line approach to immigration.

As they fan out across sun-bleached barrios this summer, the activists cite the example of California.

More than 1 million California Latinos became citizens after the passage of anti-illegal immigrant Proposition 187 in 1994, putting the state solidly in the hands of Democrats and pushing immigration crackdowns to the margins.

Many analysts and political scientists predict a similar outcome — eventually — in Arizona. Latinos, 30% of the population, are the fastest-growing and youngest demographic group in the state.

"It's the same energy I saw with 187," said Ben Monterroso, a Service Employees International Union official who spearheaded voter registration in California in 1994 and now oversees the Arizona operation. "People are saying enough is enough."

But Arizona may be much more difficult to change, partly because Latinos are a smaller piece of the electorate in the state than in California, said Harry Pachon of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute at USC.

And Stan Barnes, a lobbyist and former Republican legislator in the Arizona Senate, said the state's crackdown on illegal immigrants would bring out other new voters — ones who support sealing the border.

"The average guy in Arizona believes that Mexico has become a narco state and that is coming to Arizona," Barnes said. "The fact that the Arizona government has rallied to confront that has energized a whole new electorate."

It's obvious which way the political wind is blowing in the state that has become the favorite illegal entry point from Mexico. Few candidates for statewide office here, even Democrats who opposed SB 1070, are openly sympathetic to illegal immigrants.

New hard-line measures pop up seemingly every day. Last week, a Republican candidate for the state Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities, proposed shutting off power to homes of illegal immigrants.

Polls show that SB 1070 is popular in Arizona, except among Latinos; in the most lopsided survey, as much as 81% opposed it. The get-out-the-vote campaign, launched in June by a coalition of labor, community and religious groups, is trying to channel that outrage in November.

The canvassers target Latinos who are already registered but rarely vote. Latino voter turnout hovers about 35%, and about 60% of all Arizona voters went to the polls in the last off-year election. Sixteen percent of registered voters in the state are Latino.

Francisco Heredia, the state director of Mi Familia Vota, the nonprofit spearheading the campaign, said the decision to focus on turnout was forced partly by Arizona law requiring people to prove their citizenship status before registering to vote. That makes it cumbersome for canvassers to sign up people who don't have documents handy or are wary about sharing them with strangers.

At 1:45 p.m. on Wednesday, about two dozen canvassers filled a conference room in SEIU headquarters in Phoenix, chatting with a smaller group in Tucson via video. The walls were lined with papers listing how many voters other groups in the campaign had reached.

The campaign is trying to vastly increase the number of Latinos who sign up to receive mail-in ballots, which will make it easier for them to vote. The field coordinator, Martin Manteca, totaled the numbers and announced that they were at 2,300.

In pairs, the canvassers, all younger than 30, filed out and were driven to precincts around town. Yvette Saenz, 17, and Israel Araujo, 23, walked a blue-collar stretch of south Phoenix known as Sunland.

It was an appropriate name on this day, as the mercury climbed to 110 degrees. Before approaching doors, they rattled fences to make sure they weren't surprised by guard dogs.

"Anyone eligible to vote here?" Araujo asked a white-haired man who answered the door at one of the first houses.

"No, I'm from Mexico. I don't got no papers," the man said in English.

"Don't tell Arpaio," he quipped, referring to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, notorious in the community for arresting suspected illegal immigrants.

For every successful contact, there were dozens of unanswered knocks, or voices behind opaque screen doors telling the canvassers to leave.

After Araujo registered Rafael Robles to vote, there was a distinct spring in the canvasser's step.

"That keeps me going," said Araujo, who recently graduated from community college and plans to keep canvassing until he enrolls at Arizona State University to pursue an electrical engineering degree.

By the time Araujo and Saenz were done almost six hours later, they had persuaded 20 voters to sign up for mail-in ballots and had registered nine new voters.

*
It's high time somebody pointed out the real racists in this controversy. And yes, that would be many of those making the charges of racism.

THE REALITY OF THE MEXICAN INVASION OF ARIZONA!
"I live in a Tucson neighborhood that is a major drug corridor. In the last four months there have been over 24 violent home invasions resulting in a number of deaths. It's harvest time now for marijuana in Mexico and Central America. We expect the number of deaths to increase.
"One of the other tragedies is human trafficking. 'Coyotes' bring vans overfilled with illegal immigrants across the border, and because the load is more than the vehicle is designed for, the vehicle will often roll, or go off the road, killing the innocent people on board."
*
DOES ANYONE DOUBT THAT IN MEX OCCUPIED GANG AND WELFARE CAPITAL OF LA RAZA LAND, LOS ANGELES THAT ILLEGALS TAKE PRIORITY? THEY DO IN JOBS! 47% OF THOSE WITH A JOB ARE FREAKING ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS!

Gregory Kane: Do Latinos take priority over whites in Arizona?
By: GREGORY KANE
May 6, 2010

America's open-borders crowd didn't just play the race card in the nation's latest immigration debate. This bunch whipped out an entire deck.
We have none other than the Revvum Al Sharpton himself -- who no one has described as "Mr. Racial Harmony" -- weighing in with these gems.
"The Arizona immigration bill is an affront to the civil rights of all Americans and an attempt to legalize racial profiling."
That one was from the April 25 edition of the Wall Street Journal. The following one is from Reuters:
"I am calling for the resignation and removal of Sheriff [Joe] Arpaio. Harassment based on color is nothing short of racial profiling, which many of us helped to fight to make against the law."
Sharpton was referring to the sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona. What's Arpaio's offense, in the good revvum's view? Why, taking our nation's immigration laws seriously, of course, and rounding up those who violate them. Here's more of Sharpton continuing his anti-Arpaio rant, taken from the Reuters story:
"Arpaio needs to be confronted. He needs to be removed. We also need to suspend the law that he is using. We must stand with our brown brothers and sisters."
Sharpton lives nowhere near Arizona. If you're wondering where he found the chutzpah to dredge up with this "we" stuff, you're not alone.
Sharpton isn't alone either, not when it comes to making spurious, knee-jerk charges of racism in the wake of Arizona passing a law that allows cops to question those legally stopped about their immigration status.
It's high time somebody pointed out the real racists in this controversy. And yes, that would be many of those making the charges of racism.
Frankly, I suspect much of the reaction comes from those who are worried about how their lawns are going to be cut if there's a mass deportation of illegal immigrants. (A word of advice: cut 'em your darned selves.)
Don't non-Hispanic Arizonans get any consideration? (Actually, I suspect that many of the reported 70 percent of Arizonans who support the law are Hispanic, which makes the racism of those screaming racism even more obvious and egregious.) One of those non-Hispanic Arizonans is a woman named Elisabeth Grey, who posted this comment in reaction to the Wall Street Journal story:
"I live in a Tucson neighborhood that is a major drug corridor. In the last four months there have been over 24 violent home invasions resulting in a number of deaths. It's harvest time now for marijuana in Mexico and Central America. We expect the number of deaths to increase.
"One of the other tragedies is human trafficking. 'Coyotes' bring vans overfilled with illegal immigrants across the border, and because the load is more than the vehicle is designed for, the vehicle will often roll, or go off the road, killing the innocent people on board."
What Grey is telling us is that, in Arizona, the illegal immigrant problem is now also a public safety problem. And police are allowed to make stops -- of people on the street and in vehicles -- when crime reaches an outrageous level. If those stopped in vehicles don't have proper identification, then any competent police officer will ask those people a string of questions to determine who they are.
Here's what the opponents of Arizona's new law are saying, and it's the most outrageously racist thing of all: Police should be allowed to ask anyone legally stopped about their identities except Hispanics.
Examiner Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Do-Latinos-take-priority-over-whites-in-Arizona-92865714.html#ixzz0nm76p5ea

*
MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
From the above blog, email articles to those concerned about Obama’s endless push for amnesty.
FAIRUS.org
JUDICIAL WATCH.org
ALIPAC.us
*
WE ARE MEXICO’S WELFARE and PRISON SYSTEMS!
“Mexico’s government has provided its nationals with valuable tools to help them cross the border safely but Dominguez is the first American resident, with a salary provided by U.S. taxpayers, to openly promote such a gadget. A few years ago Mexican officials published a 32-page booklet (Guia Del Migrante Mexicano) with safety tips for border crossers and distributed hand-held satellite devices to ensure the violators complete their journey safely.”
*
MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 ARE DONORS TO LA RAZA
LA RAZA, THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA IS THE FASTEST GROWING POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA! THE GOAL IS OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY & MEXICAN SUPREMACY.
THERE ARE 90 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES’ CONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS, WHICH IS LA RAZA.
CALIFORNIA HAS FOUR LA RAZA MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. ALL ARE HIGHLY RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACISTS.
THEY ARE:
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
Rep. Xavier Becerra
Rep. Joe Baca
Rep. Loretta Sanchez
Rep. Linda Sanchez (sister above)
IN OBAMA’S STATE, Rep. Luis Gutierrez is pushing for RADICAL AMNESTY.

ALL WERE ELECTED WITH THE CONSIDERABLE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.
ALL VOTED TO INCLUDE ILLEGALS IN THE PELOSI-OBAMACARE
Reps. Becerra, and both Sanchez sisters have condemned the people of Arizona for attempting to secure their borders against the Mexican invasion, occupation, crime tidal wave, and ever expanding welfare state for illegals.
*
FIFTEEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LA RAZA “THE RACE”

by Michelle Malkin
(get Malkin’s book on OBAMA NOTED below!)


Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."
Both Barack Obama and John McCain will speak this week in San Diego at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, the Latino organization whose name is Spanish for, yes, "The Race." Can you imagine Obama and McCain paying homage to a group of white people who called themselves that? No matter. The presidential candidates and the media have legitimized "The Race" as a mainstream ethnic lobbying group and marginalized its critics as intolerant bigots. The unvarnished truth is that the group is a radical ethnic nationalist outfit that abuses your tax dollars and milks PC politics to undermine our sovereignty.
*
Here are 15 things you should know about "The Race":
*
15. "The Race" supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens.
*
14."The Race" demands in-state tuition discounts for illegal alien students that are not available to law-abiding U.S. citizens and law-abiding legal immigrants.
*
13. "The Race" vehemently opposes cooperative immigration enforcement efforts between local, state and federal authorities.
*
12. "The Race" opposes a secure fence on the southern border.
*
11. "The Race" joined the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in a failed lawsuit attempt to prevent the feds from entering immigration information into a key national crime database -- and to prevent local police officers from accessing the data.
*
10. "The Race" opposed the state of Oklahoma's tough immigration-enforcement-first laws, which cut off welfare to illegal aliens, put teeth in employer sanctions and strengthened local-federal cooperation and information sharing.
*
9. "The Race" joined other open-borders, anti-assimilationists and sued to prevent Proposition 227, California's bilingual education reform ballot initiative, from becoming law.
*
8. "The Race" bitterly protested common-sense voter ID provisions as an "absolute disgrace."
*
7. "The Race" has consistently opposed post-9/11 national security measures at every turn.
*
6. Former "Race" president Raul Yzaguirre, Hillary Clinton's Hispanic outreach adviser, said this: "U.S. English is to Hispanics as the Ku Klux Klan is to blacks." He was referring to U.S. English, the nation's oldest, largest citizens' action group dedicated to preserving the unifying role of the English language in the United States. "The Race" also pioneered Orwellian open-borders Newspeak and advised the Mexican government on how to lobby for illegal alien amnesty while avoiding the terms "illegal" and "amnesty."
*
5. "The Race" gives mainstream cover to a poisonous subset of ideological satellites, led by Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan (MEChA). The late GOP Rep. Charlie Norwood rightly characterized the organization as "a radical racist group … one of the most anti-American groups in the country, which has permeated U.S. campuses since the 1960s, and continues its push to carve a racist nation out of the American West."
*
4. "The Race" is currently leading a smear campaign against staunch immigration enforcement leaders and has called for TV and cable news networks to keep immigration enforcement proponents off the airwaves -- in addition to pushing for Fairness Doctrine policies to shut up their foes. The New York Times reported that current "Race" president Janet Murguia believes "hate speech" should "not be tolerated, even if such censorship were a violation of First Amendment rights."
*
3. "The Race" sponsors militant ethnic nationalist charter schools subsidized by your public tax dollars (at least $8 million in federal education grants). The schools include Aztlan Academy in Tucson, Ariz., the Mexicayotl Academy in Nogales, Ariz., Academia Cesar Chavez Charter School in St. Paul, Minn., and La Academia Semillas del Pueblo in Los Angeles, whose principal inveighed: "We don't want to drink from a White water fountain, we have our own wells and our natural reservoirs and our way of collecting rain in our aqueducts. We don't need a White water fountain … ultimately the White way, the American way, the neo liberal, capitalist way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction."
*
2. "The Race" has perfected the art of the PC shakedown at taxpayer expense, pushing relentlessly to lower home loan standards for Hispanic borrowers, reaping millions in federal "mortgage counseling" grants, seeking special multimillion-dollar earmarks and partnering with banks that do business with illegal aliens.
*
1. "The Race" thrives on ethnic supremacy -- and the elite sheeple's unwillingness to call it what it is. As historian Victor Davis Hanson observes: "[The] organization's very nomenclature 'The National Council of La Raza' is hate speech to the core. Despite all the contortions of the group, Raza (as its Latin cognate suggests) reflects the meaning of 'race' in Spanish, not 'the people' -- and that's precisely why we don't hear of something like 'The National Council of the People,' which would not confer the buzz notion of ethnic, racial and tribal chauvinism."
*
The fringe is the center. The center is the fringe. Viva La Raza.
*
“Wherever there’s a Mexican, there is Mexico!”... President Calderone. As an American living under Spanish speaking Mexican occupation, I would add to this “Where there’s a Mexican, there’s a violent Mexican gang!”
*
LA RAZA AGENDA: 3 Examples
Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over. . We are here to stay."

Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."
*
THE LA RAZA AGENDA
AGENDA OF LA RAZA, et al
TAKEN FROM TRANSCRIPTS DATED 1995. MANY OF THESE LA RAZA POLITICIANS HAVE WON HIGHER OFFICES WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS.

“WE WILL TAKE CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY (U.S.) BY VOTE IF POSSIBLE AND VIOLENCE IF NECESSARY!”
Agendas of MEChA, La Raza, MALDEF, and Southwest Voter Registration Projects These are transcripts of live, recorded statements by elected U.S. politicians, college professors, and pro-illegal alien activists whose objective is to take control of our country "by vote if possible and violence if necessary!" 1. Armando Navarro, Prof. Ethnic Studies, UC Riverside at Latino Summit Response to Prop 187, UC Riverside, 1/1995
"These are the critical years for us as a Latino community. We're in a state of transition. And that transformation is called 'the browning of America'. Latinos are now becoming the majority. Because I know that time and history is on the side of the Chicano/Latino community. It is changing in the future and in the present the balance of power of this nation. It's a game - it's a game of power - who controls it. You (to MEChA students) are like the generals that command armies. We're in a state of war. This Proposition 187 is a declaration of war against the Latino/Chicano community of this country. They know the demographics. They know that history and time is on our side. As one community, as one people, as one nation within a nation as the community that we are, the Chicano/Latino community of this nation. What this means is a transfer of power. It means control."

“THE NEW LEADERSHIP OF THE AMERICAS... IS MEXICAN!”
“REMEMBER: (PROPOSITION) 187 IS THE LAST GASP OF WHITE AMERICA IN CALIFORNIA!”

2. ART TORRES
Art Torres, former CA state senator, currently Chair of California Democrat Party at UC Riverside 1/1995 "Que viva la causa! It is an honor to be with the new leadership of the Americas, here meeting at UC Riverside. So with 187 on the ballot, what is it going to take for our people to vote - to see us walking into the gas ovens? It is electoral power that is going to make the determination of where we go as a community. And power is not given to you -- you have to take it. Remember: 187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that. And people say to me on the Senate floor when I was in the Senate, 'Why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs?' And I tell my white colleagues, 'because you're going to need them.'"

“WE ARE NOT IMMIGRANTS THAT CAME FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY TO ANOTHER COUNTRY....WE ARE FREE TO TRAVEL THE LENGTH AND BREADTH OF THE AMERICAS BECAUSE WE BELONG HERE.”

3. Jose Angel Gutierrez, Prof. Univ. Texas at Arlington, founder La Raza Unida Party at UC Riverside 1/1995 "The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We cannot - we will not- and we must not be made illegal in our own homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We just have to survive. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."

“WE HAVE TO BAND TOGETHER, AND THAT MEANS LATINOS IN FLORIDA, CUBAN-AMERICANS, MEXICAN-AMERICAS, PUERTO RICANS, SOUTH AMERICANS, WE HAVE TO NETWORK BETTER......”
BILL RICHARDSON. WE ALL WERE WITNESS TO OBAMA, ALWAYS THE HISPANDERER, ATTEMPT TO PUT RICHARDSON IN HIS CABINET TO SIGNAL THE ILLEGALS THAT AMNESTY WAS COMING. LIKE MOST HISPANIC POLITICIANS, RICHARDSON WAS TOO CORRUPT TO PASS EVEN THE CORRUPT CONGRESS AND WITHDREW HIS NOMINATION.
4. Bill Richardson, New Mexico Governor, former U.S. Congressman, U.N. Ambassador, U.S. Secretary of Energy interviewed on radio Latino USA responding to Congressional Immigration Reform legislation in 1996 "There are changing political times where our basic foundations and programs are being attacked, illegal and legal immigration are being unfairly attacked. We have to band together, and that means Latinos in Florida, Cuban-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, South Americans, we have to network better - we have to be more politically minded, we have to put aside party and think of ourselves as Latinos, as Hispanics more than we have in the past."


“WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER ALL THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS IN CALIFORNIA. IN FIVE YEARS THE HISPANICS ARE GOING TO BE THE MAJORITY POPULATION OF THIS STATE.... ANYONE THAT DOESN’T LIKE IT SHOULD LEAVE IT!”, Mario Obledo,
Mario Obledo, founding member/former national director of Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), former CA Secretary Health/Welfare on Tom Leikus radio talk show "We're going to take over all the political institutions in California. In five years the Hispanics are going to be the majority population of this state." Caller: "You also made the statement that California is going to become a Hispanic state and if anyone doesn't like it they should leave - did you say that?" Obledo: "I did. They ought to go back to Europe."

“WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA.. THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION STATE!”
6. Mario Obledo CCIR commentary on Mario Obledo: When CCIR, the California Coalition for Immigration Reform, erected a billboard on the California/Arizona border reading, "WELCOME TO CALIFORNIA, THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION STATE", Mario Obledo, infuriated, went to the billboard location and threatened to blow it up or burn it down. Even after this threat to deny American citizens their freedom of speech, President Clinton awarded Obledo the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America's highest civilian honor. CCIR question to Obledo: "Jose Angel Gutierrez said, 'We have an aging white America, they are dying, I love it.' How would you translate that statement?" Obledo: "He's a good friend of mine. A very smart person."

“THEY’RE AFRAID THAT WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER THE GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS. THEY ARE RIGHT, WE WILL TAKE THEM OVER....”
7. Richard Alatorre, former Los Angeles City Councilman at Latino Summit conference in Los Angeles opposing CA Prop. 209 ending affirmative action in 9/1996 "Because our numbers are growing, they're afraid about this great mass of minorities that now live in our community. They're afraid that we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They are right, we will take them over, and we are not going to go away - we are here to stay, and we are saying 'ya basta' (enough!) and we are going to turn... and de... not elect or re-elect people that believe that they are going to advance their political careers on the backs of immigrants and the backs of minorities."

MEXICAN SUPREMACIST LA RAZA PARTY REP. FROM INLAND EMPIRE WHERE HE WORKS HARD TO THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN OCCUPATION AND WELFARE SYSTEM.


“THE LATINOS ARE COMING... THE LATINOS ARE COMING!!! AND THEY’RE GOING TO VOTE!”

8. Joe Baca, former CA Assemblymember, currently member of Congress at Latino Summit Response to Prop 187 UC Riverside 1/1995 and Southwest Voter Registration Project annual conference in Los Angeles, 6/1996 "We need more Latinos out there. We must stand up and be counted. We must be together, We must be united. Because if we're not united you know what's going to happen? We're like sticks - we're broken to pieces. Divided we're not together. But as a unit they can't break us. So we've got to come together, and if we're united, si se puede (it can be done) and we will make the changes that are necessary. But we've got to do it. We've got to stand together, and dammit, don't let them divide us because that's what they want to do, is to divide us. And once we're divided we're conquered. But when we look out at the audience and we see, you know, la familia, La Raza (the family, our race), you know, it's a great feeling, isn't it a good feeling? And you know, I started to think about that and it reminded me of a book that we all read and we all heard about, you know, Paul Revere, and when he was saying, 'The British are coming, the British are coming!' Well, the Latinos are coming, the Latinos are coming! And the Latinos are going to vote. So our voices will be heard. So that's what this agenda is about. It's about insuring that we increase our numbers. That we increase our numbers at every level. We talk about the Congressional, we talk about the Senate, we talk about board of supervisors, board of education, city councils, commissions, we have got to increase out numbers because the Latinos are coming. Because what's going on right now, with 187, the CCRI (CA Civil Rights Initiative against affirmative action), and let me tell you, we can't go back, you know, we're in a civil war. But we need to be solidified, we need to come together, we must be strong, because united we form a strong body. United we become solidified, united we make a difference, united we make the changes, united Latinos will win throughout California, let's stick together, que si se puede, que no? (it can be done, right?)

“IF THEY’RE SUPPORTING LEGISLATION THAT DENIES THE UNDOCUMENTED DRIVER’S LICENSE, THEY DON’T BELONG IN OFFICE, FRIENDS. THEY DON’T BELONG HERE!”
9. Antonio Villaraigosa, Chair of MEChA (student wing of Aztlan movement) at UCLA, former CA assemblymember, former CA Assembly speaker, currently Los Angeles City Mayor, and formerly Councilman at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference in Los Angeles, 6/1997 "Part of today's reality has been propositions like 187 (to deny public benefits to illegal aliens, 1994), propositions like 209 (to abolish affirmative action, 1996), the welfare reform bill, which targeted legal immigrants and targeted us as a community. That's been the midnight. We know that the sunny side of midnight has been the election of a Latino speaker - was the election of Loretta Sanchez, against an arch-conservative, reactionary hate-mongering politician like Congressman Dornan! Today in California in the legislature, we're engaged in a great debate, where not only were we talking about denying education to the children of undocumented workers, but now we're talking about whether or not we should provide prenatal care to undocumented mothers. It's not enough to elect Latino leadership. If they're supporting legislation that denies the undocumented driver's licenses, they don't belong in office, friends. They don't belong here. If they can't stand up and say, 'You know what? I'm not ever going to support a policy that denies prenatal care to the children of undocumented mothers', they don't belong here."


GLORIA MOLINA, RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACIST IS NOW ON THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. A HUGE PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S REVENUES ARE PAID OUT TO ILLEGALS. LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALCULATES THAT THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY IS ABOUT $2 BILLION PER YEAR AND GROWING FAST.

“I’M GONNA GO OUT THERE AN VOTE BECAUSE I WANT TO PAY THEM BACK!”10. Gloria Molina, one of the five in Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "This community is no longer going to stand for it. Because tonight we are organizing across this country in a single mission, in a plan. We are going to organize like we've never organized before. We are going to go into our neighborhoods. We are going to register voters. We are going to talk to all of those young people that need to become registered voters and go out to vote and we're are politicizing every single one of those new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country. And what we are saying is by November we will have one million additional Latino voters in this country, and we're gonna march, and our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you, there's a lot of people that are saying, 'I'm gonna go out there and vote because I want to pay them back!' And this November we are going to remember those that stood with us and we are also going to remember those that have stood against us on the issues of immigration, on the issues of education, on the issues of health care, on the issues of the minimum wage."

“LONG LIVE OUR RACE!”

11. Vicky Castro, former member of Los Angeles Board of Education at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1996 "Que viva la raza, que viva la raza (long live our race)! I'm here to welcome all the new voters of 18 years old that we're registering now in our schools. Welcome, you're going to make a difference for Los Angeles, for San Antonio, for New York, and I thank Southwest for taking that challenge. And to the Mechistas (MEChA students) across this nation, you're going to make that difference for us, too. But when we register one more million voters I will not be the only Latina on the Board of Education of Los Angeles. And let me tell you here, no one will dismantle bilingual education in the United States of America. No one will deny an education to any child, especially Latino children. As you know, in Los Angeles we make up 70% of this school district. Of 600,000 -- 400,000 are Latinos, and our parents are not heard and they're going to be heard because in Los Angeles, San Antonio and Texas we have just classified 53,000 new citizens in one year that are going to be felt in November!"

“I STARTED THIS VERY QUIETLY BECAUSE THERE ARE THOSE THAT IF THEY KNEW THAT WE WERE CREATING A WHOLE NEW CADRE OF BRAND NEW CITIZENS IT WOULD HAVE TREMENDOUS POLITICAL IMPACT.”


“WE HAVE PROCESSED A LITTLE OVER 78,000 BRAND NEW CITZENS.”12. Ruben Zacarias, former superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District at Southwest Voter Registration Project Conference, 6/1997 "We have 27 centers now throughout LAUSD. Every one of them has trained people, clerks to take the fingerprints. Each one has the camera, that special camera. We have the application forms. And I'll tell you what we've done with I.N.S. Now we're even doing the testing that usually people had to go to INS to take, and pretty soon, hopefully, we'll do the final interviews in our schools. Incidentally, I started this very quietly because there are those that if they knew that we were creating a whole new cadre of brand new citizens it would have tremendous political impact. We will change the political panorama not only of L.A., but L.A. County and the State. And we do that we've changed the panorama of the nation. I'm proud to stand here and tell you that in those close to three years we have processed a little over 78,000 brand new citizens. That is the largest citizenship program in the entire nation."

“I HAVE PROUDLY AFFIRMED THAT THE MEXICAN NATIONAL EXTENDS BEYOND THE TERRITORY ENCLOSED BY ITS BORDERS....”

13. Ernesto Zedillo, former president of Mexico announcing the Mexican constitutional amendment allowing for dual citizenship on 6/23/97 "I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican national extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders, and that Mexican migrants are an important - a very important part of it. For that reason my government proposed a constitutional amendment to allow any Mexican with the right as he desires to acquire another nationality to do so without being forced to first give up his or her Mexican nationality. Fortunately, the amendment was passed almost unanimously by our federal Congress and is now part of our constitution. I am also here today to tell you that we want you to take pride in what each and every one of your Mexican brothers and sisters are doing back home.

“WE’RE HERE... TO SHOW THE WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANT L.A., THE FEW OF YOU WHO REMAIN, THAT WE ARE THE MAJORITY, AND WE CLAIM THIS LAND AS OURS, IT’S ALWAYS BEEN OURS, AND WE’RE STILL HERE, AND NONE OF THE TALK ABOUT DEPORTING. IF ANYONE’S GOING TO BE DEPORTED IT’S GOING TO BE YOU!”

“WE ARE THE MAJORITY IN L.A. THERE’S OVER SEVEN MILLION MEXICANS IN L.A. COUNTY ALONE
*
LA RAZA – “THE (MEXICAN) RACE”….
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA
1126 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
202-785 1670
Get on La Raza’s email list to find out what this fascist party is doing to expand the Mexican occupation. NCLR.org
FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE, AND MEXICAN SUPREMACY
LA RAZA is the virulently racist political party for ILLEGALS (only Mexicans) and the corporations that benefit from illegals, and the employers of illegals. IT IS ILLEGAL TO HIRE AN ILLEGAL.
LA RAZA IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA and has contempt for AMERICANS, AMERICAN LAWS, AMERICAN LANGUAGE, AMERICAN BORDERS, and the AMERICAN FLAG.
However LA RAZA does like the AMERICAN WELFARE SYSTEM. The welfare system in the country is so good that Mexico has dumped 38 million of their poor, illiterate , criminal and frequently pregnant over our border.
*
FAIRUS.org
FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM
FAIR CHARACTERIZES THE OBAMA, AND LA RAZA DEMS PLAN FOR AMNESTY AS FOLLOWS:
That's why, throughout 2009 FAIR has been tracking every move the administration and Congress has made to undermine our immigration laws, reward illegal aliens and burden taxpayers.
• Foot-dragging on proven methods of immigration law enforcement including border structures and E-Verify.
• Appointment of several illegal alien advocates to important administration posts.
• Watering down of the 287(g) program to limit local law in their own jurisdictions.
• Health care reform that mandates a “public option” for newly-arrived legal immigrants as well as illegal aliens.