DOWNLOADS: (814)

PLAYS: (1576)

Embed

Those Dred Scott Republicans who want to do away with the 14th Amendment and birthright citizenship are sure being ever so helpful when it comes to reforming our immigration laws.

They won't approve any plan creating a path to citizenship for the 12 million or so immigrants who are here illegally because, according to Republicans, that's "amnesty." Of course, they also agree that we can't round up and deport 12 million people. But any plan with a citizenship path -- regardless of how many penalties you throw at the immigrants, including heavy fines -- means Republicans will denounce it as "amnesty."

And what do they propose to fix the problem? Why, amend the Constitution, of course. Why, what could be simpler?

And the best part is: Their proposal to amend the 14th Amendment to throw out birthright citizenship wouldn't even solve an identifiable problem -- except a fake "anchor baby" scare that exists only in the fevered imaginations of paranoid white nativists.

Sen. Harry Reid and the Democrats understand this. So do some conservatives. And so yesterday Reid replied to the senators like Lindsey Graham and Jon Kyl, who think "anchor babies" are a major threat facing the nation, by reading from an op-ed by onetime Reagan/Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson:

The authors of the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed citizenship to all people "born or naturalized in the United States" for a reason. They wished to directly repudiate the Dred Scott decision, which said that citizenship could be granted or denied by political caprice.

They purposely chose an objective standard of citizenship -- birth -- that was not subject to politics. Reconstruction leaders established a firm, sound principle: To be an American citizen, you don't have to please a majority, you just have to be born here.

Reid then paraphrased Gerson by observing of his Republican colleagues, "They've either taken leave of their senses or their principles.

As you can see in the video above, even some Fox News anchors and reporters are not so certain it's such a sound idea.

But the best part of all this is, as we explained when Russell Pearce proposed such a law for Arizona, the entire enterprise is predicated on the notion that, as Pearce put it, we'll never solve the problem of illegal immigration if we don't cut off the great big incentive of having "anchor babies" here.

Continue reading »

Gov. Brewer: We cannot afford all this illegal immigration and everything that comes with it, everything from the crime to the drugs to the kidnapping and the extortion and the be-headings...

Governor Jan Brewer and the John McCains of Arizona are pushing the most disgusting lies about border violence to justify their race hating immigration law. In republican circles, if you repeat a lie long enough they believe it to be fact. I mean, how can any poll of Americans consider President Obama to be a socialist? But, that's conservatism for you. Jan Brewer is doing her best to match Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle and Rand Paul in her effusive lying about illegal immigration violence.

Washington Monthly:

We talked a week ago about Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) trying to defend her anti-immigrant policies, prompting her to argue that immigrants entering the U.S. illegally are responsible for "beheadings." All available evidence suggests Brewer just made it up, and her office hasn't been able to substantiate the claim.

But Brewer seems to be leading a larger crusade among Arizona Republicans, making it seem as if their state is on the verge of immigrant-based anarchy, overrun with immigrant drug trafficking, kidnappings, and police shootings. The more the rest of the country hears about these nightmare scenarios, the more they're inclined to support measures like the odious Arizona immigration law.

Dana Milbank explained today, "Last year gave us death panels and granny killings, but compared with the nonsense justifying the immigration crackdown, the health-care debate was an evening at the Oxford Union Society."

Two months ago, the Arizona Republic published an exhaustive report that found that, according to statistics from the FBI and Arizona police agencies, crime in Arizona border towns has been "essentially flat for the past decade." For example, "In 2000, there were 23 rapes, robberies and murders in Nogales, Ariz. Last year, despite nearly a decade of population growth, there were 19 such crimes." The Pima County sheriff reported that "the border has never been more secure."

FBI statistics show violent crime rates in all of the border states are lower than they were a decade ago -- yet Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) reports that the violence is "the worst I have ever seen." President Obama justifiably asserted last week that "the southern border is more secure today than any time in the past 20 years," yet Rush Limbaugh judged the president to be "fit for the psycho ward" on the basis of that remark.

The "beheadings" lie was amusing in its hyperbole, but we're reaching a point at which nearly every claim made by Arizona Republicans and their allies is simply, demonstrably wrong. Violence from Mexican drug cartels is spreading north? There's no evidence of that. Phoenix, according to McCain, is the "No. 2 kidnapping capital of the world"? No, it's not. Most immigrants from Mexico are drug mules? That's wrong, too. Most law-enforcement shootings are at the hands of undocumented immigrants? Total bunk.

John McCain embarrassed himself during the general election when he sucked up to such right wing extremists as Pastor John Hagee. The very people that he once considered "lunatics" when he ran for president in 2000:

McCain, who had been courting the endorsement for over a year, said that he was “very honored by Pastor John Hagee’s endorsement.”

Demonstrating how wildly out of the American religious and political mainstream Hagee’s views are, McCain’s acceptance of Hagee’s endorsement was condemned today by conservative William Donohue, president of the Catholic League. Calling Hagee a “bigot,” Donahue said the right-wing pastor has waged “an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church” by “calling it ‘The Great Whore,’ an ‘apostate church,’ the ‘anti-Christ,’ and a ‘false cult system.’”

If a far right religious zealot like Bill Donohue was appalled, what does that say about John McCain? And why is he a weekly guest on all the Sunday Talk Shows? I predict the ex-maverick will be pushed into the Aztlan theory very soon. Maybe Brewer and McCain will appear at the next white supremacist rally put together by Barbara Coe.

DOWNLOADS: (1148)

PLAYS: (926)

Embed

President Obama's speech this morning on comprehensive immigration reform was a good start to getting the ball rolling with this effort. (The transcript is here.) But that's all it was. And like a lot of Obama speeches, it was strong on philosophical substance -- though typically, it equivocated in trying to split the middle between the "poles" of the debate -- and pretty short on practical details for getting it done. He didn't even forecast a deadline for legislation.

The heart of the speech was this part:

Our task then is to make our national laws actually work -– to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And that means being honest about the problem, and getting past the false debates that divide the country rather than bring it together.

For example, there are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. And often this argument is framed in moral terms: Why should we punish people who are just trying to earn a living?

I recognize the sense of compassion that drives this argument, but I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally.

Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.

Now, if the majority of Americans are skeptical of a blanket amnesty, they are also skeptical that it is possible to round up and deport 11 million people. They know it’s not possible. Such an effort would be logistically impossible and wildly expensive. Moreover, it would tear at the very fabric of this nation -– because immigrants who are here illegally are now intricately woven into that fabric. Many have children who are American citizens. Some are children themselves, brought here by their parents at a very young age, growing up as American kids, only to discover their illegal status when they apply for college or a job. Migrant workers -– mostly here illegally -– have been the labor force of our farmers and agricultural producers for generations. So even if it was possible, a program of mass deportations would disrupt our economy and communities in ways that most Americans would find intolerable.

Now, once we get past the two poles of this debate, it becomes possible to shape a practical, common-sense approach that reflects our heritage and our values. Such an approach demands accountability from everybody -– from government, from businesses and from individuals.

Then, as you can see in the video above, Obama lays out his strategy for getting this done: Republicans have to come on board. Well, in the year of the Tea Parties, we wish him lots of luck on that. This is just a recipe for endless compromises in legislation the name of bringing aboard a Republican who in the end turns around and screws them when the time to vote arrives. We saw this in the health-care debate, in financial reform, and a dozen other legislative initiatives. It doesn't work with these guys.

Frank Sharry of America's Voice has some thoughts about all this:

Be sure and read Sharry's more detailed thoughts at HuffPo. He's one of our best thinkers on immigration, and the president would do well to hew more closely to Sharry's advice on this than Rahm's, ifyaknowaddimean.

The All Spin Zone

The Downing Street Memo might be receiving some serious backup shortly.

Sir Jeremy Greenstock was the U.K. Ambassador to the United Nations at the time the war in Iraq was launched in 2003. After the fall of Baghdad, he was Tony Blair's envoy in Iraq during the days of Proconsul Bremer's Coalition Provisional Authority. And he has written what is apparently a scathing book on the subject.

In a story published in the Sunday Observer, Greenstock is quoted as saying:

• The American decision to go to war was “politically illegitimate”

• UN negotiations “never rose over the level of awkward diversion for the US administration”

• The opportunities of the post-conflict period were “dissipated in poor policy analysis and narrow-minded execution”

...
The problem is, we may never read the book - at least in a unredacted version. The UK Foreign Office and Downing Street have apparently put a hold on publication.

...The decision to block the book until Greenstock removes substantial passages will be interpreted as an attempt by ministers to avoid further embarrassing disclosures over the conduct of the war and its aftermath from a highly credible source.

Officials who have seen the book are understood to have been 'deeply shocked' over the way in which Greenstock has quoted widely from 'privileged' private conversations with Tony Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and from the private deliberations of the UN Security Council...

It's also a safe bet that the manuscript has made its way around Washington, and that some degree of pressure has been brought on the U.K. government by the U.S. State Department.

Apparently, Sir Jeremy became very disillusioned with the whole process that led up to the war, and then the immediate aftermath when it became clear that post-invasion planning was an afterthought. But if so, that begs the question - where was Sir Jeremy during the U.N. debate, and why didn't he express his reservations during deliberations prior to the war? What good does a mea culpa do two years after the fact, at a time when both the U.S. and U.K. are hopelessly stuck in a quagmire with no end in sight?

Most certainly, this won't be the last such “tell all” book or article from a high ranking memeber of the Bush / Blair inner circle. I suspect we'll see many in the future. But for the moment, allow me to pose a serious question to Sir Jeremy Greenstock, who apparently now seeks absolution for his sins of commision and/or omission:

Where were you when it mattered?

...The decision to block the book until Greenstock removes substantial passages will be interpreted as an attempt by ministers to avoid further embarrassing disclosures over the conduct of the war and its aftermath from a highly credible source.

Officials who have seen the book are understood to have been 'deeply shocked' over the way in which Greenstock has quoted widely from 'privileged' private conversations with Tony Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and from the private deliberations of the UN Security Council...

It's also a safe bet that the manuscript has made its way around Washington, and that some degree of pressure has been brought on the U.K. government by the U.S. State Department.

Apparently, Sir Jeremy became very disillusioned with the whole process that led up to the war, and then the immediate aftermath when it became clear that post-invasion planning was an afterthought. But if so, that begs the question - where was Sir Jeremy during the U.N. debate, and why didn't he express his reservations during deliberations prior to the war? What good does a mea culpa do two years after the fact, at a time when both the U.S. and U.K. are hopelessly stuck in a quagmire with no end in sight?

Most certainly, this won't be the last such “tell all” book or article from a high ranking memeber of the Bush / Blair inner circle. I suspect we'll see many in the future. But for the moment, allow me to pose a serious question to Sir Jeremy Greenstock, who apparently now seeks absolution for his sins of commision and/or omission:

Where were you when it mattered?

NY Times Covers OSHA Impersonation Story        Confined Space

The story of immigration officers impersonating OSHA officials, has now gone national with a front page article in the NY Times by Steven Greenhouse, who first read the story in Confined Space earlier this week.

The 48 immigrants thought they were attending mandatory safety training by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. But it was not until they showed up to the meeting in Goldsboro, N.C., last week that they discovered they had been summoned for an altogether different reason.

Federal immigration officials had posted

Making Up Stories Rox Populi

Now that the gang at Powerline and Michelle Malkin have been proven again to be the the lying tools that they are (uh, and blaming Tom Harkin or looking for another scapegoat sorta goes against the whole Republican "personal responsibility" thing, doesn't it?), they'll need to find, as Atrios and Hilzoy suggest, a new scandalous untruth to spread to their drooling minions.

In the interest of bi-partisanship, I think we should help them brainstorm some ideas.

What shall it be, then? Illegal immigrants sneak into San Diego homes to drink the blood of unsuspecting white babies? Jimmy Carter performed a human sacrifice in the Lincoln Bedroom back in '78 and that's why he's not going to the Pope's funeral? Hillary Clinton conspired to have a guy murdered and then covered it up? John Kerry shot his entire squad in Vietnam and replaced them with hippie look-a-likes he found partying with Hanoi Jane in Ho Chi Min City?
Obviously, I'm not in my best "creative zone" this morning. So, help me out by leaving your suggestions in comments below.
",0]);D(["ce"]);D(["ms","2f64"]);//-->

Obviously, I'm not in my best "creative zone" this morning. So, help me out by leaving your suggestions in comments below.

DOWNLOADS: (604)

PLAYS: (1310)

Embed

Fox News' Megyn Kelly invited Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on yesterday morning to explain exactly why she signed into law a bill that effectively transformed her state into a police state for immigrants and Latinos.

As she has done all along, Brewer mostly whined about how mean her critics were, including all of the folks from other cities who are now officially boycotting Arizona. Kelly listed some of them and asked:

Kelly: Do you think that these folks who are all noticeably outside of your state, are the ones that I just ticked off, including the President, have an appreciation, governor, for what Arizona has been going through with respect to illegal immigration?

Brewer: Obviously not. You know Arizona has been under terrorist attacks, if you will, with all of this illegal immigration that has been taking place on our very porous border. ... The whole issue comes back, that we do not and will not tolerate illegal immigration bringing with it very much so the implications of crime and terrorism into our state.

Terrorism? Does anyone have any idea what Brewer is talking about?

I know that much of the hysteria that was whipped up to push this bill through was based on the murder of Arizona rancher Robert Krentz, who was in fact almost certainly slain by a scout for the drug cartels.

Nonetheless, the Right -- embodied by Fox News -- consistently described his killer as an "illegal immigrant" -- even though the man was not crossing the border to emigrate, but to enable drug crossings on the border.

In other words, the Krentz case was not about illegal immigration, but drug smuggling across the border -- an entirely separate issue. Indeed, Brewer and the Republicans would have been far more effective in attacking that problem by passing laws decriminalizing marijuana.

Perhaps more to the point, Brewer is living in another universe if she's trying to claim that the wave off immigration that has hit Arizona in the past decade has produced a crime wave. As Media Matters points out:

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the violent crime rate in Arizona was lower in 2006, 2007, and 2008 -- the most recent year from which data are available -- than any year since 1983. The property crime rate in Arizona was lower in 2006, 2007, and 2008 than any year since 1968. In addition, in Arizona, the violent crime rate dropped from 577.9 per 100,000 population in 1998 to 447 per 100,000 population in 2008; the property crime rate dropped from 5,997 to 4,291 during the same period. During the same decade, Arizona's undocumented immigrant population grew rapidly.

As for terrorism in Arizona, the only case I can recall of any kind of recent vintage was the Viper Militia bunch arrested back in 1996 -- though some of their rabid supporters have been showing up at Tea Party rallies with guns.

The only terrorist of note to come from Arizona was Robert Mathews, the leader of the neo-Nazi gang The Order.

But those folks are all operating at the same end of the political spectrum as their pal Joe Arpaio -- who was the inspiration for this legislation in the first place.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

This May 1st, immigrant communities and citizens alike will hit the streets to say no to Arizona's new "show me your papers law" and yes to real, federal action on immigration reform this year. Eighty cities across the country are gearing up for major rallies, marches, and protests tomorrow. Students who had come in from New York, Florida, and California to participate in the Washington protests led their own action in front of Governor Jan Brewer's DC office today. They chanted, "Arizona, Shame On You! Immigrants Are People, Too!"

Watch it:

Tomorrow's marches are a follow-up to the major March for America: Change Takes Courage, which drew over 200,000 people to the National Mall on March 21st. At that event, President Obama delivered a firm message promising he'd work on comprehensive immigration reform "this year." Now, with Arizona's new law driving already-desperate communities into action, we're likely to see events in Chicago, New York, and L.A. turn out tens of thousands of people.

At the DC event, 40 protesters will go so far as to risk arrest, practicing peaceful civil disobedience in the face of cynical Washington politics.

Deepak Bhargava, Executive Director of the Center for Community Change, writes today at Huffington Post:

Tomorrow, there will be over 80 demonstrations in favor of immigration reform across America. One of them will be in Lafayette Park, across the street from the White House. There, some 40 dignitaries including a member of Congress, clergy, heads of organizations and community leaders will likely be arrested in acts of civil disobedience against unjust immigration enforcement and the political cowardice in addressing our broken immigration system. I will be one of those getting arrested.

I am willing to get arrested tomorrow because the massive deportations being undertaken by the Obama Administration are tearing apart families, separating children from their parents, risking the lives of disabled immigrants and vulnerable refugees, and spreading terror into our communities. I will be arrested because America needs to understand immigration reform is not merely a political issue; our broken system is a moral disaster unfolding in our nation. Civil disobedience is important at this point because it signals to our leaders that the current situation is so unjust and unsustainable that people are no longer willing to comply or be complicit in the injustices committed by our government.

Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), who just announced that he intends to join in the civil disobedience, released this statement:

We have to keep the pressure on and let the President and Congress know we need immigration reform this year," the Congressman said Friday. "I am joining the rally in Washington because the effort to get immigration reform passed is escalating, the attacks on immigrants and immigration reform are escalating, and the Arizona law is a wake-up call that inaction at the federal level has huge consequences for communities, families, and individuals.

WHAT:   Rally for Immigration Reform

WHEN: Saturday May 1, at 2:00 p.m. ET (music program starts at 1:30 p.m.)

WHERE: Lafayette Square, (across Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House)

In addition to civil disobedience, many May Day events will feature celebrities who are taking a stand against what happened in Arizona. Via Perez Hilton:

And if you're lucky enough to be in Los Angeles this weekend, go be a part of their march with guests like Gloria and Emilio Estefan also taking part!

It's not just a hispanic issue, it's one that affects everyone regardless of their background.

Last but not least, students who've walked 1,500 miles on what they are calling the "Trail of Dreams" will be a major part of the Washington, DC event. Watch their stories:

Find a protest near you.

Here's the first look at video that was shot at the Wrigley Field immigration protest.

Protesters are upset over Arizona's new immigration law that makes it a crime to be in the U.S. illegally. The law is slated to take effect this summer.

Activists nationwide have called for a boycott of Arizona tourism and of state businesses, including its athletic teams.

Boycott Baseball Arizona Diamondbacks Style. And here's a key phrase that should be said at every rally we help orchestrate:

"Reform not racism."

They did a really great job in Chicago. We're telling Arizona that their new draconian law is unforgivable.

Twitter it, Facebook it, email it, talk about it and scream about it.

The White House is engaging and has issued a statement about the immigration problem:

What has become increasingly clear is that we can no longer wait to fix our broken immigration system, which Democrats and Republicans alike agree doesn’t work. It’s unacceptable to have 11 million people in the United States who are living here illegally and outside of the system...read on

Aspects of the Senate bill are not perfect by any means, but it's a start.

Rep. Grijalva released a statement about the Arizona problem also via press release:

For myself, I know I am going to keep the pressure up on the White House, on the Leadership in my Party, and on the Members across the aisle. We need to get a bill passed this year. If we lose hope or lose momentum or lose sight of our goal, disasters like the Arizona bill are the result. We cannot afford to let the American people down and we cannot afford to allow the continued assault on immigrant families that we are seeing from coast to coast.

Ironically, the actions of Republicans in Arizona have lit a fire in immigrant and Latino neighborhoods and have galvanized national support for a serious immigration overhaul. We have been flirting with immigration reform for years, but I think if we keep the pressure up in this political year, we can enact reform that respects working people, reunites families, secures the border, and ends illegal immigration.

Keep the pressure up. Check Arizona's schedule and stay involved. Please help get a protest off the ground so it will spread from city to city.

And remember my Hispanic friends. "Not One More Dime" should be spent in Arizona on the Diamondbacks. We're starting slowly and this will expand with your help.

A heads-up to Republicans: You guys need some serious therapy. Remember now, this is the anti-abortion, love-the-children, wave-the-flag and raise-'em-Republican party. Duncan Hunter, one of our lovely Congressman from down south where the politics get distinctly weird, actually stood in front of a group of people and said that American citizens should be deported, too.

Okay, what he actually said was that the debate wasn't about immigration; it was a national security issue. A "real, serious national security issue." When pressed to expand and provide some specifics, especially about those children of immigrants born in the United States. Those children are, of course, United States citizens.

“Would you support deportation of natural born American citizens that are the children of illegal aliens?” a man in the audience asked.

“I would have to, yes,” Hunter said.

“You can look and say, ‘You’re a mean guy. That’s a mean thing to do. That’s not a humanitarian thing to do.’ We simply cannot afford what we’re doing right now.

Hunter then blames immigrants for California's budget crisis. I'd argue that tax-dodging rich folks have more to do with the budget crisis than immigrants.

Is there a problem and costs associated with illegal immigration? Sure, but most of them have been created by the xenophobes who hate government regulation until it is used to exclude or otherwise discriminate against immigrants.

Yes, there's a problem with immigration. But to listen to the Duncan Hunters of the world, it's all the fault of Mexico, the only bad immigrants are Mexican immigrants, and the only real US citizens are those American children born to parents who aren't brown.

As to national security, just give me a break. The 911 crew was in the US legally, not illegally. The guy who flew into the Austin IRS building? A genuine white US citizen. There's more of a national security threat from citizens who descend from Mayflower families than there is from Mexican immigrants.

(h/t Alan Colmes)

DOWNLOADS: (644)

PLAYS: (822)

Embed

John McCain is really scrambling this time around, it seems. In this segment on BillO's show, he hammers on the Federal government for not acting rapidly enough to 'secure the borders' while defending Arizona's new Xenophobia Act requiring all immigrants to keep their documents with them for examination at any time by law enforcement. Not content to stop there, he also blames immigrants for engaging in the 'intentional accident' scams.

O'REILLY: Now, next week, the governor is going to sign, we believe, a very stringent state law that gives the police in Arizona very, very broad authority to question people. And a lot of people say it's going to be racial profiling. You're going to look for Hispanics, question them, to see if they're here legally or not. And it's just not fair. And you say why?

MCCAIN: I say that the federal responsibilities have not been fulfilled. Therefore, the states are acting -- the state of Arizona is acting and doing what they feel they need to do in light of the fact that the federal government is not fulfilling its fundamental responsibility to secure our borders. Our borders must be secure.

O'REILLY: But what about the racial profiling? You know that's going to happen has to happen.

MCCAIN: I hope -- I would be very sorry that if some of that happens. And I regret it, but I also regret the -- really, it's not just the murder of Robert Krantz. It's the people whose homes and property are being violated. It's the drive-by that -- the drivers of cars with illegals in it that are intentionally causing accidents on the freeway. Look, our border is not secured. Our citizens are not safe.

Leaving aside the usual double-talk about the Feds from a "small-government" kind of guy, let's take a minute to think about those staged accidents. Here's how they work, usually in heavy traffic:

• The guy in front of you slams his brakes on after being cut off on the freeway.
• You slam your brakes on to avoid him, but you can't quite stop fast enough, so your car rear-ends his. Because these accidents are usually staged in heavy traffic, speed at impact tends to be low, but not low enough.
• The driver you hit has some passengers, and they all claim to have neck pain.
• You have to file a police report and an insurance claim, they run up medical bills with clinics involved in the scam, and they wait for the insurance settlement to close the deal

One of my kids was the victim of one of these scams. It's not immigrants running these; it's Molly Middle Class and her cronies. Immigrants would not risk arrest by getting involved in something involving lawyers, police reports, and ongoing investigations. They just wouldn't.

But keep it up, almost-President McCain, because I'm sure it plays well with those scared seniors in Arizona and the xenophobic gun-toting, immigrant-hating folks, too. Problem is, JD Hayworth may actually do it better than you.

(h/t Media Matters)