In a pivotal year for politics, many incumbents are either stepping aside or losing their primary races; this transformation is putting many new faces on the ballot. A surprise component is the large number of black candidates making the leap into the world of political office; however 32 of these candidates are running on the GOP ticket - not the Democratic ticket.
Many realize they have a real battle on their hands, but the election of America’s first black president has prompted other black leaders to run for Congress. Not only that, but many of these political hopefuls are running as Conservatives or tea party believers.
In a New York Times story Allen West who is running for Congress in Florida says, "I ran in 2008 and raised half a million dollars, and the state party didn't support me and the national party didn't support me," he said. "But we came back and we're running and things are looking great."
The Republican Party has been without a black GOP member in Congress since 2003 and the GOP is betting on voter anger to put new faces on Capitol Hill.
The surge of tea party rallies has opened the door for many black Americans to find their groove and run for office. Some point to middle America’s willingness to look at core issues and hit the voting booths armed with the information to elect more African-American candidates.
"There is no denying that one of the things that came out of the election of Obama was that you have a lot of African-Americans running in both parties now," said Vernon Parker, who is running for an open seat in Arizona's Third District, a New York Times article stated.
However, one hurdle these 32 black Republicans face is the fact President Obama won 95 percent of the black vote in 2008. But looking to the new and improved GOP, party stalwarts voted last year to appoint Republican National Committee leader, Michael Steele an African-American. Some say this move was directly tied to the president and the Republicans who are looking to garner more support from the black community.
"For the past year, the national media has attempted to paint the Tea Party movement and opposition to the Democratic agenda as based in racism, a reaction to the election of the first African-American President in November 2008. ... The reality of the opposition makes that very difficult to believe. These African-American GOPers shows that conservatives have no barriers to entry except on policy and philosophy -- just like any other political movement," said Conservative blogger Ed Morrissey.
Jennifer Rubin contends African-Americans are conservative in a Commentary Magazine article. "African Americans, the Times discovers, are attracted to conservative social positions." She says, "If a batch of these candidates wins ... the Congressional Black Caucus will be properly recast as the Liberal Congressional Black Caucus."
The Washington Post's Amy Gardner and Krissah Thompson talk to a black Tea Party leader and wrote about the parallels to black tea partiers. "Nigel Coleman, who is black, leads the Danville TEA Party Patriots in southern Virginia. He said the fact that the movement is predominantly white doesn't mean it is inherently racist. 'I went to a wine festival yesterday,' he said. 'Weren't too many black people there, either. Nobody called them racists.'"
Meanwhile in the navy-blue state of California, Mason Weaver a black Republican sees things differently. When looking at the country’s first black president he doesn’t see the inspiration.
“I do not think a black conservative republican needs to be inspired by another mans' achievements. You would have to have a fair amount of self confidence to leave your life as a conservative black person and being politically active requires a great deal of principles,” he explained.
As far as the numerous black candidates stepping forward and running for Congress, Weaver feels the GOP experiment as the moderate party has ended.
“The Republican Party is turning away from its experimentation with ‘moderates’ and is looking for conservative candidates. Most of the conservative party activism in the past 20 years has been Christian and black. We are now in a position to run, as Conservatives not as blacks,” he says.
After months on the campaign trail, Weaver has sharpened his quips and learned how to fight for his beliefs even when opponents make jabs at his conservative platform.
“After 20 years of activism people will not change, thousands of speeches and public statements gives me credibility and speaking for the Tea Party movement has given me my support base,” he said.
“The other candidates including GOP Michael Crimmins who has been removed from the Republican Party Central Committee for unethical and racial actions, as well as defacing my campaign signs prove race descends politics. My other opponent moderate Matt Friedman, supports same sex marriage something the liberal California voters sent packing the last election. I am the only candidate who can excite our base and go after prominent Democrat incumbent Susan Davis.”
Many of these Conservative Republican candidates are finding a sea of optimism and are bracing for a "Newt Revolution" of the African-American kind.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Monday, May 24, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Another city in California remains in the “a rule of law” for immigration category
The residents from Escondido, California packed the City Council chambers to show their support for Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law. The southern Californian residents wanted to challenge Councilmember Olga Diaz's attempt to chastise Arizona.
“Those who support Arizona outnumbered the opposition 10 to 1. It seemed that some of those in opposition had been ‘imported’ from outside Escondido to protest,” said Tisha Bennett of Escondido and founder of CERS. “Residents here agree with Arizona that the federal government has failed the American people.”
According to Bennett, American patriots outnumbered the pro-illegal immigrant activists about 125 – 20 and just as past council meetings with this type of agenda on the ballot, the event procured several members of the media.
Bennett spoke during the open comments portion and presented the City Council with a letter signed by more than 400 Escondido citizens praising the city and Escondido Police Department for their traffic safety and DUI checkpoints which have removed thousands of unlicensed drivers from Escondido roads in the past four years.
Bennett reiterated the fact that the 2007 city resolution which declared Escondido a law-and-order and anti-sanctuary city meant the council could not take up this Arizona law issue. This resolution has been met with ire by open-border supporters all over San Diego County, yet Escondido Police Chief Jim Maher stands by the law.
When the item introduced by Councilmember Diaz was presented, Councilman Dick Daniels immediately raised the fact that the city charter prohibits the council from addressing issues outside the city of Escondido. Arizona’s SB1070 is clearly regulated outside the state as well as the city, he said.
After some wrangling among the council members about that legitimacy of the item, the council finally agreed and the resolution was tabled. Those in attendance burst out in loud applause and cheers thanking the council for making the right decision. The open-border activists were clearly disappointed with the results.
Council member Diaz was never able to discuss her views regarding the Arizona illegal immigration law. However she took the time to speak at the end of the meeting.
She read from a prepared statement; “The Arizona law transcends that state. It erodes our rights,” Diaz said. “The Fourth Amendment protects us from unreasonable searches.”
It’s worth pointing out that most of the crowd had left by the time Diaz was allowed to speak.
The city of Escondido’s population is approximately 45 percent Latino and they were not able to join the San Diego City Council and School Boards in their effort to chastise Arizona’s new law which basically states word for word the federal government’s law on enforcing illegal immigration.
The Orange County Register also reported that not all cities are siding with open-border activists. For example the city of Costa Mesa has taken the opposite stance and stands by Arizona. “The City Council made it clear Tuesday night that people who are in the country illegally are not welcome in their city.”
City Council members passed a resolution declaring Costa Mesa is a “Rule of Law City.” The Mayor, Allan Mansoor, is a long time vocal opponent of illegal immigration.
“I have a lot of concerns with cities calling themselves sanctuary cities," Mansoor said before the vote in the OC Register. “It's important we state that we do not support illegal immigration.”
Other California cities are looking to support Arizona as well. For instance, the city of Rancho Santa Margarita in Orange County has put Arizona’s SB 1070 resolution on their agenda for May 26. The council also will also be discussing and adopting the “Rule of Law” city measure as well.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
“Those who support Arizona outnumbered the opposition 10 to 1. It seemed that some of those in opposition had been ‘imported’ from outside Escondido to protest,” said Tisha Bennett of Escondido and founder of CERS. “Residents here agree with Arizona that the federal government has failed the American people.”
According to Bennett, American patriots outnumbered the pro-illegal immigrant activists about 125 – 20 and just as past council meetings with this type of agenda on the ballot, the event procured several members of the media.
Bennett spoke during the open comments portion and presented the City Council with a letter signed by more than 400 Escondido citizens praising the city and Escondido Police Department for their traffic safety and DUI checkpoints which have removed thousands of unlicensed drivers from Escondido roads in the past four years.
Bennett reiterated the fact that the 2007 city resolution which declared Escondido a law-and-order and anti-sanctuary city meant the council could not take up this Arizona law issue. This resolution has been met with ire by open-border supporters all over San Diego County, yet Escondido Police Chief Jim Maher stands by the law.
When the item introduced by Councilmember Diaz was presented, Councilman Dick Daniels immediately raised the fact that the city charter prohibits the council from addressing issues outside the city of Escondido. Arizona’s SB1070 is clearly regulated outside the state as well as the city, he said.
After some wrangling among the council members about that legitimacy of the item, the council finally agreed and the resolution was tabled. Those in attendance burst out in loud applause and cheers thanking the council for making the right decision. The open-border activists were clearly disappointed with the results.
Council member Diaz was never able to discuss her views regarding the Arizona illegal immigration law. However she took the time to speak at the end of the meeting.
She read from a prepared statement; “The Arizona law transcends that state. It erodes our rights,” Diaz said. “The Fourth Amendment protects us from unreasonable searches.”
It’s worth pointing out that most of the crowd had left by the time Diaz was allowed to speak.
The city of Escondido’s population is approximately 45 percent Latino and they were not able to join the San Diego City Council and School Boards in their effort to chastise Arizona’s new law which basically states word for word the federal government’s law on enforcing illegal immigration.
The Orange County Register also reported that not all cities are siding with open-border activists. For example the city of Costa Mesa has taken the opposite stance and stands by Arizona. “The City Council made it clear Tuesday night that people who are in the country illegally are not welcome in their city.”
City Council members passed a resolution declaring Costa Mesa is a “Rule of Law City.” The Mayor, Allan Mansoor, is a long time vocal opponent of illegal immigration.
“I have a lot of concerns with cities calling themselves sanctuary cities," Mansoor said before the vote in the OC Register. “It's important we state that we do not support illegal immigration.”
Other California cities are looking to support Arizona as well. For instance, the city of Rancho Santa Margarita in Orange County has put Arizona’s SB 1070 resolution on their agenda for May 26. The council also will also be discussing and adopting the “Rule of Law” city measure as well.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Obama, Mexican President bash Arizona's new law
The hits just keep on coming for the state of Arizona. Despite the majority of Americans standing by the Grand Canyon state when it comes to enforcing federal immigration law, the President of the United States couldn’t help taking another swipe at Arizona.
The White House is entertaining Mexican President Felipe Calderon and topic of discussion turned to Arizona’s attempt to curtail out-of-control crime that threatens its residents and costs that could bankrupt the state.
Republican candidate for Governor Steve Poizner, who is running against Meg Whitman, released the following statement today after President Obama’s and Mexican President Calderon’s press conference at the White House attacking immigration law and supporting amnesty.
"It’s outrageous to see the President of the United States stand alongside Mexico's President Felipe Calderon on the White House lawn today to criticize Arizona’s efforts to address a serious challenge that neither leader has demonstrated the fortitude to handle: stopping illegal immigration and securing the border. Americans across the country, especially in California, believe illegal immigration is a problem, even if President Obama and President Calderon do not. That’s why I strongly support Arizona’s efforts to deal with this pressing issue. If the federal government will not tackle this national security concern, California and the states will. To President Obama and President Calderon, I have a message: No amnesty and secure the borders once and for all."
However, President Obama had a different view and noted at a joint press conference in the Rose Garden with Mexican President Calderon; “In the 21st century we are not defined by our borders, but by our bond. So I say to you and the Mexican people let us stand together…let us work together.” Obama then spoke a few words in Spanish to show his solidarity with Calderon.
Mexican President Calderon decided to add to Obama’s distain for enforcing federal immigration law and Calderon too criticized the Arizona law. He stated there needed to be cooperation in order to fix the U.S./Mexican immigration issue; but “such laws as the Arizona law that is forcing our people to face discrimination. If we are divided, we cannot overcome these problems.”
While the immigration issue was the center of attention in Washington, it didn’t stop the back and forth currently taking place in between California and Arizona.
One of the commissioners for the Arizona Corporation Commission, Gary Pierce, wrote a letter to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, protesting the Los Angeles City Council's decision to suspend all city-related travel to Arizona; prevent new contracts with Arizona; and review current contracts to try and to legally terminate the agreement.
Pierce pointed out that Arizona provides 25 percent of the electricity consumed in the Los Angeles region, he stated, “If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation.” However, Los Angeles representatives shrugged off the threat.
“I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands,'' Pierce noted. “If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy.”
Since the Arizona illegal immigration legislation has been passed and signed into law, California politicians have been the biggest critics. Nevertheless, California has a similar law in place that went into effect in 2001.
State in 2001: California Penal Code Section 834b reads as follows;
834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public
entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the
cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.
The Orange County Register reported yesterday that not all cities are siding with open border activists. For example the city of Costa Mesa has taken the opposite stance and stands by Arizona. “The City Council made it clear Tuesday night that people who are in the country illegally are not welcome in their city.”
City Council members passed a resolution declaring Costa Mesa is a “Rule of Law City.” The Mayor, Allan Mansoor, is a long time vocal opponent of illegal immigration.
“I have a lot of concerns with cities calling themselves sanctuary cities," Mansoor said before the vote in the OC Register. “It's important we state that we do not support illegal immigration.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The White House is entertaining Mexican President Felipe Calderon and topic of discussion turned to Arizona’s attempt to curtail out-of-control crime that threatens its residents and costs that could bankrupt the state.
Republican candidate for Governor Steve Poizner, who is running against Meg Whitman, released the following statement today after President Obama’s and Mexican President Calderon’s press conference at the White House attacking immigration law and supporting amnesty.
"It’s outrageous to see the President of the United States stand alongside Mexico's President Felipe Calderon on the White House lawn today to criticize Arizona’s efforts to address a serious challenge that neither leader has demonstrated the fortitude to handle: stopping illegal immigration and securing the border. Americans across the country, especially in California, believe illegal immigration is a problem, even if President Obama and President Calderon do not. That’s why I strongly support Arizona’s efforts to deal with this pressing issue. If the federal government will not tackle this national security concern, California and the states will. To President Obama and President Calderon, I have a message: No amnesty and secure the borders once and for all."
However, President Obama had a different view and noted at a joint press conference in the Rose Garden with Mexican President Calderon; “In the 21st century we are not defined by our borders, but by our bond. So I say to you and the Mexican people let us stand together…let us work together.” Obama then spoke a few words in Spanish to show his solidarity with Calderon.
Mexican President Calderon decided to add to Obama’s distain for enforcing federal immigration law and Calderon too criticized the Arizona law. He stated there needed to be cooperation in order to fix the U.S./Mexican immigration issue; but “such laws as the Arizona law that is forcing our people to face discrimination. If we are divided, we cannot overcome these problems.”
While the immigration issue was the center of attention in Washington, it didn’t stop the back and forth currently taking place in between California and Arizona.
One of the commissioners for the Arizona Corporation Commission, Gary Pierce, wrote a letter to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, protesting the Los Angeles City Council's decision to suspend all city-related travel to Arizona; prevent new contracts with Arizona; and review current contracts to try and to legally terminate the agreement.
Pierce pointed out that Arizona provides 25 percent of the electricity consumed in the Los Angeles region, he stated, “If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation.” However, Los Angeles representatives shrugged off the threat.
“I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands,'' Pierce noted. “If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy.”
Since the Arizona illegal immigration legislation has been passed and signed into law, California politicians have been the biggest critics. Nevertheless, California has a similar law in place that went into effect in 2001.
State in 2001: California Penal Code Section 834b reads as follows;
834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public
entity.
(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the
cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.
The Orange County Register reported yesterday that not all cities are siding with open border activists. For example the city of Costa Mesa has taken the opposite stance and stands by Arizona. “The City Council made it clear Tuesday night that people who are in the country illegally are not welcome in their city.”
City Council members passed a resolution declaring Costa Mesa is a “Rule of Law City.” The Mayor, Allan Mansoor, is a long time vocal opponent of illegal immigration.
“I have a lot of concerns with cities calling themselves sanctuary cities," Mansoor said before the vote in the OC Register. “It's important we state that we do not support illegal immigration.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Conservative convention in San Diego draws hundreds
California Eagle Forum held their annual convention in San Diego last weekend, drawing speakers, politicians, and Patriots from all over the U.S. with the common theme of "taking back America" from the politicians in both parties.
The event kicked off on Friday night with more than 350 attendees at dinner many of whom were excited to hear headliner popular Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachman. She gave a rousing speech to a sold out crowd about the need to defeat the liberal, big government agenda in this year's elections. Bachman made it clear everyone needed to not only donate what they could more importantly donate their time to conservative candidates who share common sense values.
Also speaking at the two-day convention was Conservative icon and Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, who was responsible for derailing many pieces of legislation in her days in politics.
She was joined by a long list of popular figures in the modern conservative and tea party movements. Bob Basso, who portrays Thomas Paine at Tea Parties across the country rallied the crowd on both Friday and Saturday with his Patriotic, motivational speeches about fighting for our founding American principles of freedom and liberty.
Also attending and speaking at the Conservative forum were California Senatorial candidate Chuck DeVore, local San Diego sheriff candidate Jay LaSuer and two gubernatorial candidates - independent Chelene Nightingale and Republican Larry Naritelli, who both resonated with the conservative crowd more than the two leading contenders; billionaire Republicans Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner. Californians are treated to a barrage of negative television commercials all day long in the Golden State.
Former Congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter Sr. and a popular candidate running for Congress in San Diego, Mason Weaver also gave well-received speeches on Saturday.
It was the first time the Eagle Convention was held in San Diego and the forum has been in place for nine years. This was an amazing feat since the San Diego Eagle Forum chapter was founded just eight months ago by Woody Woodrum.
The forum included the largest collection of diverse and non-partisan groups in San Diego. The event focused its attention on educating folks haw to make a difference at a grassroots level in order to take back America in the November midterms.
Other noteworthy speakers and candidates included: Orly Taitz, who is running for California Sec. of State, Christine Rubin, who is running for state Assembly 77 and James O'Keefe, the "ACORN pimp" video Journalist.
A big announcement was also made at the weekend event by Nightingale who said she was endorsed by former Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo of Colorado.
Saturdays dinner wrap up introduced the community leaders from across the state Eagle Forum San Diego concept and start up of T.O.P.S. (Take Our Politics Seriously).
T.O.P.S. is a leadership caucus with more than 30 conservative groups interested in communicating, consolidating and coordinating efforts among the conservative community. Also unveiled was a tool for conservative groups to use focusing attention on likely voters.
Not only did Woody's Eagle Forum team pull off this successful San Diego Convention, they were instrumental in coordinating the appearance of Congresswoman Bachmann at three other locations (Orange County, Palm Desert and Rancho Santa Fe).
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Event organizers suggest those interested in a grassroots movement look up these Eagle Forum participants on the internet; BetterCourtsNow.com, Chuck DeVore for US Senate, Christine Rubin for 77th State Assembly, Orly Taitz for Secretary of State and Lydia Gutierrez for Superintendent of Public Instruction.
The event kicked off on Friday night with more than 350 attendees at dinner many of whom were excited to hear headliner popular Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachman. She gave a rousing speech to a sold out crowd about the need to defeat the liberal, big government agenda in this year's elections. Bachman made it clear everyone needed to not only donate what they could more importantly donate their time to conservative candidates who share common sense values.
Also speaking at the two-day convention was Conservative icon and Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, who was responsible for derailing many pieces of legislation in her days in politics.
She was joined by a long list of popular figures in the modern conservative and tea party movements. Bob Basso, who portrays Thomas Paine at Tea Parties across the country rallied the crowd on both Friday and Saturday with his Patriotic, motivational speeches about fighting for our founding American principles of freedom and liberty.
Also attending and speaking at the Conservative forum were California Senatorial candidate Chuck DeVore, local San Diego sheriff candidate Jay LaSuer and two gubernatorial candidates - independent Chelene Nightingale and Republican Larry Naritelli, who both resonated with the conservative crowd more than the two leading contenders; billionaire Republicans Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner. Californians are treated to a barrage of negative television commercials all day long in the Golden State.
Former Congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter Sr. and a popular candidate running for Congress in San Diego, Mason Weaver also gave well-received speeches on Saturday.
It was the first time the Eagle Convention was held in San Diego and the forum has been in place for nine years. This was an amazing feat since the San Diego Eagle Forum chapter was founded just eight months ago by Woody Woodrum.
The forum included the largest collection of diverse and non-partisan groups in San Diego. The event focused its attention on educating folks haw to make a difference at a grassroots level in order to take back America in the November midterms.
Other noteworthy speakers and candidates included: Orly Taitz, who is running for California Sec. of State, Christine Rubin, who is running for state Assembly 77 and James O'Keefe, the "ACORN pimp" video Journalist.
A big announcement was also made at the weekend event by Nightingale who said she was endorsed by former Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Tom Tancredo of Colorado.
Saturdays dinner wrap up introduced the community leaders from across the state Eagle Forum San Diego concept and start up of T.O.P.S. (Take Our Politics Seriously).
T.O.P.S. is a leadership caucus with more than 30 conservative groups interested in communicating, consolidating and coordinating efforts among the conservative community. Also unveiled was a tool for conservative groups to use focusing attention on likely voters.
Not only did Woody's Eagle Forum team pull off this successful San Diego Convention, they were instrumental in coordinating the appearance of Congresswoman Bachmann at three other locations (Orange County, Palm Desert and Rancho Santa Fe).
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Event organizers suggest those interested in a grassroots movement look up these Eagle Forum participants on the internet; BetterCourtsNow.com, Chuck DeVore for US Senate, Christine Rubin for 77th State Assembly, Orly Taitz for Secretary of State and Lydia Gutierrez for Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Gardner press conference yields few new details
Now that John Gardner has been convicted and sentenced to three life terms in prison for Chelsea King and Amber Dubois murders, the San Diego law enforcement community held a collective press conference to answer questions from the media. While many questions were asked, reporters were left with confirmation on details dug up during the investigative phase of the double murder and rape cases.
Details that stood out included acknowledgment that Gardner was taken out of county jail on a field trip to point out where he buried Amber Dubois’ body. Authorities say the excursion lasted approximately three hours. During this time there was another search in Escondido at Kit Carson Park and the media speculated this was a ruse to keep press away from the recovery of Amber’s remains that however was dispelled by the Escondido Police Department.
Law enforcement representatives at the press conference invoked Marcy’s Law several times to prevent the media from the gory details that are protected under the California law. This law ensures victims’ families are reasonably shielded from gruesome details that could cause undo stress and privacy issues.
The only family members at the press conference were Amber’s father Moe Dubois and his girlfriend. (Amber’s mother was in New York talking to Good Morning America.)
The King family chose not to attend and submitted a statement through their attorneys Luce Forward. The statement read in part, “we continue to advocate for the preservation of Chelsea’s dignity and prevention of further trauma to her family… To preserve those rights, we have made written request to all involved agencies not to voluntarily disclosure or discuss the crime scene photographs that depict Chelsea, any sexual assault examination reports or photographs by the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s office regarding Chelsea.”
The King family further explains that the community has suffered enough and only seeks the opportunity to grieve and heal in the coming months. “The perpetrator has been captured, confessed to his crimes and shortly will be sent to prison for life. It is time for healing, not a time to unearth painful details made irrelevant by the defendant’s decision to admit his crimes,” the statement concluded.
It’s true the perpetrator has been caught but in order to prevent future breakdowns in law enforcement investigations they must garner all the relevant information. It is clear there were a number of breakdowns along the way and currently the bull’s-eye lands on the San Diego Police Department.
The SDPD handled jogger Candice Moncayo’s attack in the same Rancho Bernardo park just weeks earlier in late December. Little was gleaned from this police report and SDPD Capt. Jim Collins offered nothing new.
The attack was classified as a robbery, even though Moncayo was tackled, told her attacker ‘you’ll have to kill if you want to rape me.’ Gardner replied, “That can be arranged.” Before Moncayo was able to break free, she elbowed Gardner in the nose and then he apparently asked for money.
Again this took place in an isolated location and female joggers usually do not carry cash while running. Moncayo herself said she thought it was an attempted rape.
However, the jogger was able to fight off her attacker and reported that she elbowed her assailant in the face most likely breaking his nose- this self-defense gave her an opportunity to run for her life.
The San Diego Police Department was called to investigate the scene and after interviewing the victim concluded it was a failed robbery.
“A failed robbery? How many women go jogging in a county park carrying a purse, computer, camera and cash? Anyone with common sense knows something like would take place at a car or home,” says Poway resident Carry who wished to protect her last name.
The jogging victim’s mother found the outcome odd as well. She reported that her daughter was tackled like a football player and a large man fitting Gardner’s description tried to aggressively subdue her daughter.
This where the communication break downs begin. San Diego Police Department was convinced the female was a victim of a robbery attempt because at some point during the attack he asked for money. Not many women are buying that excuse.
According to Moncayo who was attacked on Dec. 27th, she wanted to sit down with a police sketch artist to create a composite drawing of her attacker; the SDPD was too busy to follow through with her request. However, the female returned home to her Colorado home and was able to get a local Police Dept. to draw a sketch. The likeness to Gardner is astonishing.
“There’s a lot of frustration and anger out there right now,” said Gary Carlson the Rancho Bernardo neighborhood watch coordinator. “The San Diego Police Department did not personally notify us after the Dec. 27th attack occurred. It was a failure in communications that the attack was classified as a simple robbery on the crime log.”
According to Carlson, recent cutbacks in community spending may have been a factor in the SDPD not reaching out to community leaders sooner. Had the Police Department notified community leader an action plan would have been implemented.
“First, we would have notified all of our district leaders who would bring neighbors up to speed. The community would have mobilized and put together fliers to post at local businesses, entrances to the park as well as post fliers door-to-door.”
Finally, the Rancho Bernardo Neighborhood Watch group would have posted information on their website and been in constant contact with law enforcement officers monitoring the case progress.
“Hind sight is 20/20, but I can say we would have been proactive,” Carlson said.
Moving forward Carlson believes the police and community can learn from this tragedy and figure out a communication system that will provide a timely alert mechanism for future incidents that may arise.
Collins went on to explain the Moncayo attack lasted no more than 30 seconds and acknowledged the DNA obtained from Moncayo’s elbow sat on the DNA labs shelf until Gardner was arrested for Chelsea’s murder.
Yet when asked about the current county backlog on DNA, Collins said there was a two to three week wait. However, the DNA labs admit the wait is many months and in some of the rape kits cases the wait is well over a year.
If the Moncayo case was handled differently, perhaps, Chelsea would be alive today, community residents speculated.
When discussion turned to the death penalty, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis repeated the office line that “the death penalty is a hollow promise in California.” However she only admitted Gardner’s public defender was the one who requested that the death penalty be taken off the table when pressed further by reporters. The end result led law enforcement officials to Ambers remains in Pala California about 30 minutes north of her home.
In the end all the explanations will not bring back Amber or Chelsea home and the community is no closer to knowing how the mind of criminal psychopath Gardner works, but Kristen Spieler, deputy district attorney who handled the legal prosecution summed it up best. “The defect was not in his mind, it was in his character.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Details that stood out included acknowledgment that Gardner was taken out of county jail on a field trip to point out where he buried Amber Dubois’ body. Authorities say the excursion lasted approximately three hours. During this time there was another search in Escondido at Kit Carson Park and the media speculated this was a ruse to keep press away from the recovery of Amber’s remains that however was dispelled by the Escondido Police Department.
Law enforcement representatives at the press conference invoked Marcy’s Law several times to prevent the media from the gory details that are protected under the California law. This law ensures victims’ families are reasonably shielded from gruesome details that could cause undo stress and privacy issues.
The only family members at the press conference were Amber’s father Moe Dubois and his girlfriend. (Amber’s mother was in New York talking to Good Morning America.)
The King family chose not to attend and submitted a statement through their attorneys Luce Forward. The statement read in part, “we continue to advocate for the preservation of Chelsea’s dignity and prevention of further trauma to her family… To preserve those rights, we have made written request to all involved agencies not to voluntarily disclosure or discuss the crime scene photographs that depict Chelsea, any sexual assault examination reports or photographs by the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s office regarding Chelsea.”
The King family further explains that the community has suffered enough and only seeks the opportunity to grieve and heal in the coming months. “The perpetrator has been captured, confessed to his crimes and shortly will be sent to prison for life. It is time for healing, not a time to unearth painful details made irrelevant by the defendant’s decision to admit his crimes,” the statement concluded.
It’s true the perpetrator has been caught but in order to prevent future breakdowns in law enforcement investigations they must garner all the relevant information. It is clear there were a number of breakdowns along the way and currently the bull’s-eye lands on the San Diego Police Department.
The SDPD handled jogger Candice Moncayo’s attack in the same Rancho Bernardo park just weeks earlier in late December. Little was gleaned from this police report and SDPD Capt. Jim Collins offered nothing new.
The attack was classified as a robbery, even though Moncayo was tackled, told her attacker ‘you’ll have to kill if you want to rape me.’ Gardner replied, “That can be arranged.” Before Moncayo was able to break free, she elbowed Gardner in the nose and then he apparently asked for money.
Again this took place in an isolated location and female joggers usually do not carry cash while running. Moncayo herself said she thought it was an attempted rape.
However, the jogger was able to fight off her attacker and reported that she elbowed her assailant in the face most likely breaking his nose- this self-defense gave her an opportunity to run for her life.
The San Diego Police Department was called to investigate the scene and after interviewing the victim concluded it was a failed robbery.
“A failed robbery? How many women go jogging in a county park carrying a purse, computer, camera and cash? Anyone with common sense knows something like would take place at a car or home,” says Poway resident Carry who wished to protect her last name.
The jogging victim’s mother found the outcome odd as well. She reported that her daughter was tackled like a football player and a large man fitting Gardner’s description tried to aggressively subdue her daughter.
This where the communication break downs begin. San Diego Police Department was convinced the female was a victim of a robbery attempt because at some point during the attack he asked for money. Not many women are buying that excuse.
According to Moncayo who was attacked on Dec. 27th, she wanted to sit down with a police sketch artist to create a composite drawing of her attacker; the SDPD was too busy to follow through with her request. However, the female returned home to her Colorado home and was able to get a local Police Dept. to draw a sketch. The likeness to Gardner is astonishing.
“There’s a lot of frustration and anger out there right now,” said Gary Carlson the Rancho Bernardo neighborhood watch coordinator. “The San Diego Police Department did not personally notify us after the Dec. 27th attack occurred. It was a failure in communications that the attack was classified as a simple robbery on the crime log.”
According to Carlson, recent cutbacks in community spending may have been a factor in the SDPD not reaching out to community leaders sooner. Had the Police Department notified community leader an action plan would have been implemented.
“First, we would have notified all of our district leaders who would bring neighbors up to speed. The community would have mobilized and put together fliers to post at local businesses, entrances to the park as well as post fliers door-to-door.”
Finally, the Rancho Bernardo Neighborhood Watch group would have posted information on their website and been in constant contact with law enforcement officers monitoring the case progress.
“Hind sight is 20/20, but I can say we would have been proactive,” Carlson said.
Moving forward Carlson believes the police and community can learn from this tragedy and figure out a communication system that will provide a timely alert mechanism for future incidents that may arise.
Collins went on to explain the Moncayo attack lasted no more than 30 seconds and acknowledged the DNA obtained from Moncayo’s elbow sat on the DNA labs shelf until Gardner was arrested for Chelsea’s murder.
Yet when asked about the current county backlog on DNA, Collins said there was a two to three week wait. However, the DNA labs admit the wait is many months and in some of the rape kits cases the wait is well over a year.
If the Moncayo case was handled differently, perhaps, Chelsea would be alive today, community residents speculated.
When discussion turned to the death penalty, District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis repeated the office line that “the death penalty is a hollow promise in California.” However she only admitted Gardner’s public defender was the one who requested that the death penalty be taken off the table when pressed further by reporters. The end result led law enforcement officials to Ambers remains in Pala California about 30 minutes north of her home.
In the end all the explanations will not bring back Amber or Chelsea home and the community is no closer to knowing how the mind of criminal psychopath Gardner works, but Kristen Spieler, deputy district attorney who handled the legal prosecution summed it up best. “The defect was not in his mind, it was in his character.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Immigration woes prompt Senator DeMint battle to complete fence
In an effort to quell the immigration debate raging across the country, Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) plans to reintroduce an amendment in a financial regulation bill that would force the federal government to finally complete the fence along the southern border.
His plan calls for the completion of 700 miles of double fencing along the U.S./Mexico border, something that has been kicked down the road several years since the Reagan amnesty in the mid-80s.
The amendment asks Congress to follow through with the completion Fence Act of 2006 before moving forward with comprehensive immigration reform.
Once the Secure Fence Act was passed several lawmakers moved to change requirements. Texas Senator Kate Bailey Hutchinson’s amendment altered the nature of the integrity of the fence. The once double-layer fence was stripped to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as needed fence.
In areas that once needed double-layer fencing, DHS was able to place vehicle barriers or small hurdles that prevents cars or trucks from passing, but people can easily walk under or over it.
As a result there has only been 34.4 miles of the double fence finished of the 700 miles on southern border. The majority of that fence took place in the San Diego area.
Retired Congressman Duncan Hunter Sr. (R-CA) didn’t let the California border city escape the double fencing requirement. As a result, the numbers of illegal immigrants has dropped and the influx has now moved to Arizona.
The double fence works, says Hunter.
Thanks to a tough primary race in Arizona, the former GOP presidential candidate John McCain (R-AZ) and Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and are cosponsoring the double fence amendment and with the immigration battle raging the Senators expect many more coworkers to join DeMint’s double-fence effort.
Looking forward, DeMint’s fence amendment has passed the Senate with bipartisan support. The amendment was offered in the FY 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. And it passed by a 54-44 vote in which 21 Democrats and 33 Republicans supported the measure.
Unfortunately this is where the good news ended as Democratic leaders removed the amendment during conference committee because “the Obama administration had opposed rapid expansion of the fence,” according to The Hill.
Moving forward the GOP believes the DeMint amendment can pass another vote if a floor vote is allowed.
Senator DeMint said in a press release, “Americans have demanded a real fence to combat the very real problems of illegal immigration that have led to human trafficking, drug trafficking, kidnapping and violence on our border. Congress will never be able to achieve long-term reform to create a legal immigration system that works until we secure our borders. We’ve had rhetoric and promises for four years without results. It’s time we completed the fence and secured our borders to protect American citizens.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
His plan calls for the completion of 700 miles of double fencing along the U.S./Mexico border, something that has been kicked down the road several years since the Reagan amnesty in the mid-80s.
The amendment asks Congress to follow through with the completion Fence Act of 2006 before moving forward with comprehensive immigration reform.
Once the Secure Fence Act was passed several lawmakers moved to change requirements. Texas Senator Kate Bailey Hutchinson’s amendment altered the nature of the integrity of the fence. The once double-layer fence was stripped to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as needed fence.
In areas that once needed double-layer fencing, DHS was able to place vehicle barriers or small hurdles that prevents cars or trucks from passing, but people can easily walk under or over it.
As a result there has only been 34.4 miles of the double fence finished of the 700 miles on southern border. The majority of that fence took place in the San Diego area.
Retired Congressman Duncan Hunter Sr. (R-CA) didn’t let the California border city escape the double fencing requirement. As a result, the numbers of illegal immigrants has dropped and the influx has now moved to Arizona.
The double fence works, says Hunter.
Thanks to a tough primary race in Arizona, the former GOP presidential candidate John McCain (R-AZ) and Senators David Vitter (R-LA) and are cosponsoring the double fence amendment and with the immigration battle raging the Senators expect many more coworkers to join DeMint’s double-fence effort.
Looking forward, DeMint’s fence amendment has passed the Senate with bipartisan support. The amendment was offered in the FY 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. And it passed by a 54-44 vote in which 21 Democrats and 33 Republicans supported the measure.
Unfortunately this is where the good news ended as Democratic leaders removed the amendment during conference committee because “the Obama administration had opposed rapid expansion of the fence,” according to The Hill.
Moving forward the GOP believes the DeMint amendment can pass another vote if a floor vote is allowed.
Senator DeMint said in a press release, “Americans have demanded a real fence to combat the very real problems of illegal immigration that have led to human trafficking, drug trafficking, kidnapping and violence on our border. Congress will never be able to achieve long-term reform to create a legal immigration system that works until we secure our borders. We’ve had rhetoric and promises for four years without results. It’s time we completed the fence and secured our borders to protect American citizens.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Friday, May 14, 2010
Gardner sentenced for the murder of two San Diego teenagers that rocked San Diego
John Gardner was convicted and sentenced for the murder and rape of two San Diego teenagers as well as the attempted rape of a college jogger. Gardner received two life sentences with out the possibility of parole for the murders and another 25 years for the attempted rape of the jogger- all to be served concurrently.
While the details of Gardner’s life may be certain, the healing process is just beginning for the families who lost their daughters in a brutal and senseless manner.
From the onset it was clear Gardner was agitated and knew the wrath of words he would have to listen to as each parent approached the podium and expressed what anger they felt for someone who wasn’t of this life.
The biggest reaction Gardner displayed came from hearing Amber’s mom Carrie McGonigle, he literally broke down and crocodile tears streamed down his face. McGonigle expressed distain for Gardner’s actions, but ended with “I forgive you, but I will never forget that you stole my daughter from me.”
During the hour-long proceeding, two videos were played showing Amber and Chelsea in much happier times, Gardner never looked up. It appeared to attendees that if he watched it would mean he was capable of savagely murdering two young girls.
The female jogger, Candice Moncayo, who was attacked in December and threw her elbow to Gardner’s face giving her enough time to run away also spoke about the fact he stole her “safety and solitude of her runs.” She left the podium with a fitting question; “ how’s your nose?”
The King family had the harshest words for Gardner and his mother, who failed to register her son’s address and did nothing to contact authorities in the past 14 months.
Chelsea’s father, Brent, used words like “zest for life, extremely smart and self-assured,” to describe his 17-year-old daughter. He talked about the college letters that have been arriving in the mail for Chelsea and she would never attend. He explained that he never knew he had this kind of rage inside him for another human being.
On the other hand Chelsea’s mom, Kelly, demanded Gardner to look at her while she spoke. “You have taken a life worth an infinite amount of yours.” She told Gardner that he “plundered” from their family and was responsible for “dismantling’ their family life.
Again Kelly repeated; “look at me!” She then said she was not surprised by Gardner’s lack of eye contact. And she too blamed Gardner’s mother for not doing enough to protect the world from her monster of a son.
Amber Dubois’s father, Moe, told the court his daughter was raped and killed by a registered sex offender and he blamed the legal system for letting the murderer roam the streets of Escondido after his parole expired.
According to a victim-impact statement Dubois, says Gardner served a six-year prison sentence for sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 2000, but was off parole and roaming freely when he raped and murdered Amber.
Dubois pointed out that once Gardner was off parole, his GPS device was removed and was “once again this predator was allowed to stalk our streets,''
“Less than five months later, John Gardner forcefully abducted, brutally beat, physically raped and then finally heartlessly murdered and discarded our beautiful 14-year-old daughter,” Dubois said.
After a face-to face jail visit with Gardner yesterday, Amber's mother, Carrie McGonigle, said she found some closure.
Last month McGonigle said she wanted to know the details from Gardner. “I want to know as her mom, but I think the community and law enforcement also has to know, how did this guy get Amber,” she said in April. “How do we protect our kids from someone like him?”
However, Moe Dubois said the missed opportunities to protect the community from Gardner allowed a “monster” to walk the streets looking for vulnerable young girls.
“Now, with our last hope for justice, we depend on the prison community to slowly and painfully cause (Gardner's) remaining days on this earth to be a living nightmare, and I truly hope he suffers a hundred times the amount of pain he caused our family's,” Moe Dubois said in his statement to the court. “`He will burn in hell for the acts he committed, I just hope that day is an agonizingly long way away and that he will have to suffer as much as we all have, actually more.''
The 14-year-old Amber Dubois went missing in February 2009. However, her body wasn't found until two months ago. In an offer of life over death Gardner took authorities to a remote part of Pala where he discarded Amber’s remains.
The murder may have gone unsolved if Gardner was not arrested for the rape and murder of 17-year-old Chelsea King, a Poway High School senior.
Escondido Police Chief, Jim Maher said the Dubois case was just two weeks away from being placed in the cold case department.
King disappeared at the end of February while she went for an after-school run at Rancho Bernardo Community Park. It would be only three days later that Gardner was arraigned for her murder, and that he agreed to lead authorities to Amber's body in Pala.
Looking ahead Moe Dubois says he is working with lawmakers to develop laws that will help authorities respond more quickly when children are taken. He will unveil details on May 25, coinciding with National Missing Children's Day. Other ideas in the new program include requiring child predators to have special driver’s licenses.
On a side note, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger directed his administration to take action on recommendations made by the Sex Offender Management Board after a thorough review of the John Albert Gardner case.
Schwarzenegger said he directed the board to review the Gardner case and determine where systematic improvements could be made to protect communities.
The department will award contracts for a pilot program to treat designated sex offenders on parole as part of a containment model strategy and attempt to make more records available to the public, Schwarzenegger said.
As the doors closed on the courtroom, Gardner’s fate was sealed. Trying to make sense of all this seems impossible for outsiders looking in. However, Kelly King’s words echoed in the background; “Come on mom we have to get up, we have important things to do mom, very important.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
While the details of Gardner’s life may be certain, the healing process is just beginning for the families who lost their daughters in a brutal and senseless manner.
From the onset it was clear Gardner was agitated and knew the wrath of words he would have to listen to as each parent approached the podium and expressed what anger they felt for someone who wasn’t of this life.
The biggest reaction Gardner displayed came from hearing Amber’s mom Carrie McGonigle, he literally broke down and crocodile tears streamed down his face. McGonigle expressed distain for Gardner’s actions, but ended with “I forgive you, but I will never forget that you stole my daughter from me.”
During the hour-long proceeding, two videos were played showing Amber and Chelsea in much happier times, Gardner never looked up. It appeared to attendees that if he watched it would mean he was capable of savagely murdering two young girls.
The female jogger, Candice Moncayo, who was attacked in December and threw her elbow to Gardner’s face giving her enough time to run away also spoke about the fact he stole her “safety and solitude of her runs.” She left the podium with a fitting question; “ how’s your nose?”
The King family had the harshest words for Gardner and his mother, who failed to register her son’s address and did nothing to contact authorities in the past 14 months.
Chelsea’s father, Brent, used words like “zest for life, extremely smart and self-assured,” to describe his 17-year-old daughter. He talked about the college letters that have been arriving in the mail for Chelsea and she would never attend. He explained that he never knew he had this kind of rage inside him for another human being.
On the other hand Chelsea’s mom, Kelly, demanded Gardner to look at her while she spoke. “You have taken a life worth an infinite amount of yours.” She told Gardner that he “plundered” from their family and was responsible for “dismantling’ their family life.
Again Kelly repeated; “look at me!” She then said she was not surprised by Gardner’s lack of eye contact. And she too blamed Gardner’s mother for not doing enough to protect the world from her monster of a son.
Amber Dubois’s father, Moe, told the court his daughter was raped and killed by a registered sex offender and he blamed the legal system for letting the murderer roam the streets of Escondido after his parole expired.
According to a victim-impact statement Dubois, says Gardner served a six-year prison sentence for sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 2000, but was off parole and roaming freely when he raped and murdered Amber.
Dubois pointed out that once Gardner was off parole, his GPS device was removed and was “once again this predator was allowed to stalk our streets,''
“Less than five months later, John Gardner forcefully abducted, brutally beat, physically raped and then finally heartlessly murdered and discarded our beautiful 14-year-old daughter,” Dubois said.
After a face-to face jail visit with Gardner yesterday, Amber's mother, Carrie McGonigle, said she found some closure.
Last month McGonigle said she wanted to know the details from Gardner. “I want to know as her mom, but I think the community and law enforcement also has to know, how did this guy get Amber,” she said in April. “How do we protect our kids from someone like him?”
However, Moe Dubois said the missed opportunities to protect the community from Gardner allowed a “monster” to walk the streets looking for vulnerable young girls.
“Now, with our last hope for justice, we depend on the prison community to slowly and painfully cause (Gardner's) remaining days on this earth to be a living nightmare, and I truly hope he suffers a hundred times the amount of pain he caused our family's,” Moe Dubois said in his statement to the court. “`He will burn in hell for the acts he committed, I just hope that day is an agonizingly long way away and that he will have to suffer as much as we all have, actually more.''
The 14-year-old Amber Dubois went missing in February 2009. However, her body wasn't found until two months ago. In an offer of life over death Gardner took authorities to a remote part of Pala where he discarded Amber’s remains.
The murder may have gone unsolved if Gardner was not arrested for the rape and murder of 17-year-old Chelsea King, a Poway High School senior.
Escondido Police Chief, Jim Maher said the Dubois case was just two weeks away from being placed in the cold case department.
King disappeared at the end of February while she went for an after-school run at Rancho Bernardo Community Park. It would be only three days later that Gardner was arraigned for her murder, and that he agreed to lead authorities to Amber's body in Pala.
Looking ahead Moe Dubois says he is working with lawmakers to develop laws that will help authorities respond more quickly when children are taken. He will unveil details on May 25, coinciding with National Missing Children's Day. Other ideas in the new program include requiring child predators to have special driver’s licenses.
On a side note, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger directed his administration to take action on recommendations made by the Sex Offender Management Board after a thorough review of the John Albert Gardner case.
Schwarzenegger said he directed the board to review the Gardner case and determine where systematic improvements could be made to protect communities.
The department will award contracts for a pilot program to treat designated sex offenders on parole as part of a containment model strategy and attempt to make more records available to the public, Schwarzenegger said.
As the doors closed on the courtroom, Gardner’s fate was sealed. Trying to make sense of all this seems impossible for outsiders looking in. However, Kelly King’s words echoed in the background; “Come on mom we have to get up, we have important things to do mom, very important.”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Spend, spend, spend Senator Boxer loves a good bailout
California is battling a tough recession, a budget that is at least $20 billion in the red and an unemployment rate inching towards 13 percent. While the taxpayer has had enough of bailout after bailout, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) decided to bail out Fannie and Freddie Mac by voting to give them billions more to squander.
The California U.S. Senator kept Californians on the hook for the endless bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; instead of focusing on fixing the mortgage giant she cast a partisan vote against reforming the two government-run home loan companies.
Senate Democrats moved to kill an amendment this week that would have protected taxpayers from future bailouts and slow down the government control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Insiders are concerned the perpetual spending on a nearly defunct program could hinder the reelection of blue dog Democrats due the fatigue Americans have regarding the number of bailouts Washington D.C. handing out. Both of these institutions have historically showered Democrats with campaign cash.
According to The Washington Post, “The total price tag for Fannie and Freddie will be $145 billion, easily becoming the costliest element of the government's rescue of the financial system. Last week, Freddie reported a net loss of $6.7 billion in the first quarter and said it needed an additional $10.6 billion in assistance from taxpayers. Fannie's latest earnings report showed that the company continues to lose money on the trillions of dollars in loans it owns or insures. The company reported an increasing number of foreclosures.”
“Under the terms of the government's 2008 emergency takeover of Fannie and Freddie, the Treasury must pump money into either firm whenever its worth, as measured by assets minus liabilities, goes into the red. Late last year, the Obama administration pledged unlimited backing,” The Washington Post reported.
The beleaguered California senator is currently facing the toughest reelection of her tenure; she has even recruited President Obama to stop by two fundraisers to help her campaign. However, any of the three GOP contenders are within the margin of error of beating Boxer.
Of the tree candidates, there is strong support for the Conservative Chuck DeVore, former Congressman Tom Campbell and Sarah Palin endorsed Carly Fiorina, any of whom looks to turn a dark blue state into purple.
“While millions of Californians are without jobs, Barbara Boxer is forcing her constituents to bail out the same institutions that helped create the nation’s economic crisis. There’s no doubt that voters will hold Boxer accountable for her misplaced priorities on Election Day,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) spokeswoman Amber Marchand.
The California primary is June 8 and Boxer will have a fight on her hands with any of the three GOP contenders.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The California U.S. Senator kept Californians on the hook for the endless bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; instead of focusing on fixing the mortgage giant she cast a partisan vote against reforming the two government-run home loan companies.
Senate Democrats moved to kill an amendment this week that would have protected taxpayers from future bailouts and slow down the government control of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Insiders are concerned the perpetual spending on a nearly defunct program could hinder the reelection of blue dog Democrats due the fatigue Americans have regarding the number of bailouts Washington D.C. handing out. Both of these institutions have historically showered Democrats with campaign cash.
According to The Washington Post, “The total price tag for Fannie and Freddie will be $145 billion, easily becoming the costliest element of the government's rescue of the financial system. Last week, Freddie reported a net loss of $6.7 billion in the first quarter and said it needed an additional $10.6 billion in assistance from taxpayers. Fannie's latest earnings report showed that the company continues to lose money on the trillions of dollars in loans it owns or insures. The company reported an increasing number of foreclosures.”
“Under the terms of the government's 2008 emergency takeover of Fannie and Freddie, the Treasury must pump money into either firm whenever its worth, as measured by assets minus liabilities, goes into the red. Late last year, the Obama administration pledged unlimited backing,” The Washington Post reported.
The beleaguered California senator is currently facing the toughest reelection of her tenure; she has even recruited President Obama to stop by two fundraisers to help her campaign. However, any of the three GOP contenders are within the margin of error of beating Boxer.
Of the tree candidates, there is strong support for the Conservative Chuck DeVore, former Congressman Tom Campbell and Sarah Palin endorsed Carly Fiorina, any of whom looks to turn a dark blue state into purple.
“While millions of Californians are without jobs, Barbara Boxer is forcing her constituents to bail out the same institutions that helped create the nation’s economic crisis. There’s no doubt that voters will hold Boxer accountable for her misplaced priorities on Election Day,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) spokeswoman Amber Marchand.
The California primary is June 8 and Boxer will have a fight on her hands with any of the three GOP contenders.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
San Diego School Board restricts travel to Arizona– but travel to Mexico okay
The San Diego Unified School District Board of Education voted unanimously to condemn Arizona's new immigration law and will not let employees travel or do business in Arizona until they repeal the new legislation.
The initial resolution drawn up by School Board President Richard Barrera included a travel advisory warning for students K-12 and their parents about the dangers lurking in the state of Arizona. “This law is wrong,” he said.
However, board member Katherine Nakamura, who eventually voted for the resolution, recalled the increasing violence in Mexico and the board decision not to warn the student body about the thousands of murders and decapitations taking place 30 miles to the south.
Good point.
Upon reading Arizona’s new 16-page law, citizens will find it mirrors, nearly word for word, the federal law on immigration. Governor Jan Brewer said the fact that the White House has failed to respond to the growing violence in her state for more than a year has left her no choice but to let state law enforcement officers do the job Washington D.C. does not want to do.
This hasn’t stopped open-border activists from pressuring Democrat leaders and attending public meetings from city councils to school boards up and down California. Several cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego have adopted resolutions to boycott Arizona.
All this time and resources have been spent by city officials in a state that is broke, broke, broke.
Meanwhile, the majority of the country supports Arizona’s attempt to regain law and order in a state where its social programs are severely over burdened and law enforcement overwhelmed.
With all the media in place, a handful of speakers shared their two cents about why or why not the board should be taking up this issue.
Illegal immigrant activist, Javier Valdovinos, from the San Diego chapter of La Raza Educators, said Arizona's new law reminded him of how the Nazis treated the Jews in Germany.
“We need to remind students we can't remain silent when they see wrong,'' he said.
A parent of two Hispanic children, Sheila Boling, who used to live in Arizona, saw things much differently than the school board and open border activists. “The board seems to trust us to elect them and teach our kids, but we are inept at decided where we should travel. The schools have no money to teach anymore and they are worried about what another state is doing to protect their residents? It makes no sense,” said Boling.
She even went further and blamed big business for continuing their practice of hiring illegal immigrants encouraging them to cross into the country illegally for jobs. “If the government did their job and put big fines on these businesses the prospect of jobs would disappear and so would the flood of illegal immigrants to this country.”
Another community leader, Reverend David Brown gave the school board a stern warning that drew applause. “We elected the school board of this city to educate our kids not get involved in outside issues.”
Teri Linnell, who is running against Duncan Hunter for Congress, put it a little differently. “The resolution is a waste of time and money and is only increasing divisiveness.”
The school board resolution denouncing Arizona in part stated the law “undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties and poses a special threat to people of color who live in and travel through Arizona.”
According to the board members the Arizona law contains criminalization of unlawful presence that could lead to racial profiling and threaten public safety by hindering the relationship between law enforcement and the Latino community.
Needless to say, the bill calls for no racial profiling, and will not target anyone walking down the street – if you are abiding by the laws in Arizona there is no reason to worry.
The claim that “people of color” will be treated like Jewish people in Nazi Germany are flat out false, according to Arizona resident Al Garza, who is also Latino. “When you drive you are expected to have your driver’s license with you and if you travel to Mexico and pass through check points you are expected to provide Mexican officials with your ‘papers.’”
In April Arizona Gov. Brewer signed the controversial new bill and said she would “not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona. As committed as I am to protecting our state from crime associated with illegal immigration, I am equally committed to holding law enforcement accountable should this statute ever be misused to violate an individual's rights.”
Barrera's first version of the resolution asked the district to advise students and parents against traveling to Arizona.
“If we're truly concerned about our children, I wonder why we don't send a travel advisory 30 miles south in Mexico,'' chimed board member Nakamura, and just like that the travel advisory was deleted.
The provision also called on Congress to adopt federal immigration reform, the sooner the better.
This week the Los Angeles City Council also adopted a resolution demanding Arizona repeal the new law.
Councilman Ed Reyes said the law was un-American. “I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport,” he said. “If I come across an officer who's had a bad day and feels that the picture on my I.D. is not me, I could be summarily deported - no questions asked. That is not American.”
In Arizona, if that indeed happened, the Governor said there would be severe consequences and pointed out Arizona’s law enforcement is top-notch.
However, the council suspended all travel to Arizona for city-related business and told city department heads not to negotiate any contracts with companies in Arizona if it is legally and fiscally possible.
The city council also ordered a review of existing city contracts with Arizona-based companies in order to terminate them as quickly as possible. They also suggested the city attorney prepare legal ordinances to steer clear of Arizona businesses.
Legally the city doesn’t have the authority to tell its proprietary departments to end existing contracts; they can only suggest they terminate them.
It’s also worth pointing out that Los Angeles is completely broke and must make a number of cuts in services or raise taxes on the already overtaxed residents in the city.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The initial resolution drawn up by School Board President Richard Barrera included a travel advisory warning for students K-12 and their parents about the dangers lurking in the state of Arizona. “This law is wrong,” he said.
However, board member Katherine Nakamura, who eventually voted for the resolution, recalled the increasing violence in Mexico and the board decision not to warn the student body about the thousands of murders and decapitations taking place 30 miles to the south.
Good point.
Upon reading Arizona’s new 16-page law, citizens will find it mirrors, nearly word for word, the federal law on immigration. Governor Jan Brewer said the fact that the White House has failed to respond to the growing violence in her state for more than a year has left her no choice but to let state law enforcement officers do the job Washington D.C. does not want to do.
This hasn’t stopped open-border activists from pressuring Democrat leaders and attending public meetings from city councils to school boards up and down California. Several cities like San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego have adopted resolutions to boycott Arizona.
All this time and resources have been spent by city officials in a state that is broke, broke, broke.
Meanwhile, the majority of the country supports Arizona’s attempt to regain law and order in a state where its social programs are severely over burdened and law enforcement overwhelmed.
With all the media in place, a handful of speakers shared their two cents about why or why not the board should be taking up this issue.
Illegal immigrant activist, Javier Valdovinos, from the San Diego chapter of La Raza Educators, said Arizona's new law reminded him of how the Nazis treated the Jews in Germany.
“We need to remind students we can't remain silent when they see wrong,'' he said.
A parent of two Hispanic children, Sheila Boling, who used to live in Arizona, saw things much differently than the school board and open border activists. “The board seems to trust us to elect them and teach our kids, but we are inept at decided where we should travel. The schools have no money to teach anymore and they are worried about what another state is doing to protect their residents? It makes no sense,” said Boling.
She even went further and blamed big business for continuing their practice of hiring illegal immigrants encouraging them to cross into the country illegally for jobs. “If the government did their job and put big fines on these businesses the prospect of jobs would disappear and so would the flood of illegal immigrants to this country.”
Another community leader, Reverend David Brown gave the school board a stern warning that drew applause. “We elected the school board of this city to educate our kids not get involved in outside issues.”
Teri Linnell, who is running against Duncan Hunter for Congress, put it a little differently. “The resolution is a waste of time and money and is only increasing divisiveness.”
The school board resolution denouncing Arizona in part stated the law “undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties and poses a special threat to people of color who live in and travel through Arizona.”
According to the board members the Arizona law contains criminalization of unlawful presence that could lead to racial profiling and threaten public safety by hindering the relationship between law enforcement and the Latino community.
Needless to say, the bill calls for no racial profiling, and will not target anyone walking down the street – if you are abiding by the laws in Arizona there is no reason to worry.
The claim that “people of color” will be treated like Jewish people in Nazi Germany are flat out false, according to Arizona resident Al Garza, who is also Latino. “When you drive you are expected to have your driver’s license with you and if you travel to Mexico and pass through check points you are expected to provide Mexican officials with your ‘papers.’”
In April Arizona Gov. Brewer signed the controversial new bill and said she would “not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona. As committed as I am to protecting our state from crime associated with illegal immigration, I am equally committed to holding law enforcement accountable should this statute ever be misused to violate an individual's rights.”
Barrera's first version of the resolution asked the district to advise students and parents against traveling to Arizona.
“If we're truly concerned about our children, I wonder why we don't send a travel advisory 30 miles south in Mexico,'' chimed board member Nakamura, and just like that the travel advisory was deleted.
The provision also called on Congress to adopt federal immigration reform, the sooner the better.
This week the Los Angeles City Council also adopted a resolution demanding Arizona repeal the new law.
Councilman Ed Reyes said the law was un-American. “I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport,” he said. “If I come across an officer who's had a bad day and feels that the picture on my I.D. is not me, I could be summarily deported - no questions asked. That is not American.”
In Arizona, if that indeed happened, the Governor said there would be severe consequences and pointed out Arizona’s law enforcement is top-notch.
However, the council suspended all travel to Arizona for city-related business and told city department heads not to negotiate any contracts with companies in Arizona if it is legally and fiscally possible.
The city council also ordered a review of existing city contracts with Arizona-based companies in order to terminate them as quickly as possible. They also suggested the city attorney prepare legal ordinances to steer clear of Arizona businesses.
Legally the city doesn’t have the authority to tell its proprietary departments to end existing contracts; they can only suggest they terminate them.
It’s also worth pointing out that Los Angeles is completely broke and must make a number of cuts in services or raise taxes on the already overtaxed residents in the city.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Mexico’s government cries foul over Arizona’s new law
A political warning from Mexico.
Mexican Political analyst Eduardo Borunda wrote a column titled Arizona: anti-immigrant zone, he sums up his lengthy observations about the new immigration law in Arizona. With Mexico’s drug cartel problems, lack of employment opportunities for their own citizens, one has to question why many Mexican politicians are taking the time to monitor an illegal immigration law in another country rather than focus on improving the quality of life for the Mexican people. Here are some of Borunda’s findings;
“The Arizona law has as its objective to inhibit migration to the United States and protect the citizens of Arizona, but it provokes in its structure a racial problem and one of violating civil rights. President Barack Obama has in front of him the opportunity of changing the course of history or giving his back to millions of Latinos who gave him the vote to be the first president of color in the United States.
In conclusion, the topics of immigration, civil and human rights have a new direction in the United States and Mexico. No one can remain with arms crossed, neither the government of Barack Obama nor that of President Felipe Calderon. To remain inactive would cause other states to present similar bills and initiate a more difficult process in the relations between both countries. The commotion has electoral overtones. Will there be a cost at the polls for whoever governs with racial overtones? We await the results of November 2010.” A link to the article is here
“Since when did the United States heed the warning from a politically corrupt nation like Mexico? If this is the tone the Mexican hierarchy wishes to take perhaps Americans can have their $400 million of Merida initiative money back. Mexico’s government should focus on the violence and corruption within their own borders before they start dishing out demands to the American public,” says John Herbert a resident in San Diego.
As the immigration issue heads to a boiling point, lawmakers will need to choose a side in the upcoming midterm elections and according to national polling on the issue most American’s don’t favor amnesty, this is sure to put many politicians in a bit of a pickle as they campaign for reelection in November.
The statement from Borunda can be found in the Mexican newspaper Dario and was translated by the M3 Report.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Mexican Political analyst Eduardo Borunda wrote a column titled Arizona: anti-immigrant zone, he sums up his lengthy observations about the new immigration law in Arizona. With Mexico’s drug cartel problems, lack of employment opportunities for their own citizens, one has to question why many Mexican politicians are taking the time to monitor an illegal immigration law in another country rather than focus on improving the quality of life for the Mexican people. Here are some of Borunda’s findings;
“The Arizona law has as its objective to inhibit migration to the United States and protect the citizens of Arizona, but it provokes in its structure a racial problem and one of violating civil rights. President Barack Obama has in front of him the opportunity of changing the course of history or giving his back to millions of Latinos who gave him the vote to be the first president of color in the United States.
In conclusion, the topics of immigration, civil and human rights have a new direction in the United States and Mexico. No one can remain with arms crossed, neither the government of Barack Obama nor that of President Felipe Calderon. To remain inactive would cause other states to present similar bills and initiate a more difficult process in the relations between both countries. The commotion has electoral overtones. Will there be a cost at the polls for whoever governs with racial overtones? We await the results of November 2010.” A link to the article is here
“Since when did the United States heed the warning from a politically corrupt nation like Mexico? If this is the tone the Mexican hierarchy wishes to take perhaps Americans can have their $400 million of Merida initiative money back. Mexico’s government should focus on the violence and corruption within their own borders before they start dishing out demands to the American public,” says John Herbert a resident in San Diego.
As the immigration issue heads to a boiling point, lawmakers will need to choose a side in the upcoming midterm elections and according to national polling on the issue most American’s don’t favor amnesty, this is sure to put many politicians in a bit of a pickle as they campaign for reelection in November.
The statement from Borunda can be found in the Mexican newspaper Dario and was translated by the M3 Report.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Monday, May 10, 2010
Illegal immigration problems continue to flare both sides of the issue
The newly minted Customs and Border Protection Commissioner (CBP) appointee, Alan Bersin made a stop in San Diego to talk about an issue that is sweeping the country – illegal immigration.
The forum started rather interesting as Bersin added a disclaimer – in discussing this topic we should be focused on the future of immigration and port security not the past. Translation, the U.S. doesn’t want to talk about the drug cartel violence in Mexico, the lack of border security at the border or immigration crisis currently gripping the country.
After the forum Bersin took four questions from the media, three were asked and answered in Spanish while only one was in English. The event was held in a Chapel at Point Loma Nazarene University with approximately 200 college professionals and community business leaders.
Bersin’s speech centered on keeping the lanes moving across the border ports of entry, the implementation or increase of SENTRY program applicants (A fast-track lane used by those who America trusts and have passed background checks) and sharing information with Mexican counterparts.
“We have to pre-clear more of the trucking lines,” Bersin said. “It’s something I call the new bargain. Neither Mexicans or Americans like to share information with their government it’s built into the DNA of our culture…with technology we can change that,” he said.
The CBP head honcho tried to relay a message to the audience that America is lucky to not have the spillover violence, especially since Mexico is in the middle of a narco-war.
“We don’t have the spillover violence like Mexico is facing with the drug cartels...We don’t have that spillover in violence in the streets… so I think people are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the kind of political reaction that can generate a law like the Arizona law based on a couple of incidents that are tragic.”
Bersin took a page from the Obama press conference book and took only a few questions and provided lengthy wandering answers putting many in the audience to sleep.
The crime he talked about was in very general terms and steered cleared of the drug cartel violence that is taking thousands of Mexican lives each year. “We take seriously the crime directed against people in the United States as a result of organized crime,” Bersin quipped.
He also said that American’s have a terrific opportunity to improve trade relations with Mexico.
“The port of the future should have more integrated help with Mexico, “ Bersin claimed. “When it comes to where our department is going I say Si Su Pueda…”
However, Bersin did touch on the danger in “Mexico…aside from my duty to protect American people and my CBP agents upper most thing on my mind is their safety, we notify them of the danger, give them the best equipment, sharing information, we understand the danger.”
While Bersin may have been repeating some of the politically correct highlights voters have come to expect it was clear from the onset Bersin was in lock step with the Obama Administration.
The commissioner promised the attendees a three-legged approach to immigration was forthcoming; securing the border (this has been promised dating back to President Reagan), removing those who have committed crimes and developing secure legal flow of migrant workers.
It is this attitude that has the majority of Americans solidly against amnesty. “We hear promises, promises from political leaders ‘we’ll secure the border and slow those crossing’ each time they repeat it their words have no meaning,” said Sandy Jones. “We want action on the border before we commit to anything going forward.”
A recent Glenn Beck show, pointed out the majority of American’s feel reciprocal immigration laws should apply. When a foreign traveler enters Mexico, according to Mexico’s Population Law (article 67) they must abide by Mexico’s law which states; “Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues.”
Similar laws in the European Union are enforced everyday without the cries of Nazism. “Why the double standard,” Jones says.
There is no doubt immigration reform will be tough due to the many differing opinions on solutions and the Obama Administration seems content with flip flopping on the immigration reform issue day-to-day. Obama has opening criticized Arizona’s new law and then turned around and told Americans he didn’t feel their was a “political appetite” for immigration reform in the middle of tough midterm reelections this year.
Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer has responded swiftly to the Presidents’ criticism of the new law. At the recent correspondents dinner hosted by the White House for the who’s who in the media world, the President took a big swipe at Arizona by saying, “We all know what happens in Arizona if you don’t have ID, adios amigos.”
Needless to say the Governor doesn’t feel the administrations lack of knowledge and response to the plight of Arizona is a laughing matter. She has told reporters there have been five letters written to the White House and former Arizona Governor and now Secretary of DHS Janet Napolitano – all have gone unanswered. To view the new ad Brewer’s office has placed on the Internet, click on this link and play the ad. (Arizona Governor Jan Brewer new ad)
Attorney General Eric Holder chimed in on the Sunday shows and he doesn’t believe Arizona's law on illegal immigrants is racially motivated, but said it could lead law enforcement to racial profiling. He went on to say the country’s immigration problem couldn’t be fixed in a “state-by-state solution.”
The U.S. Attorney said he understood the frustration in Arizona, but he said on ABC's This Week "we could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done."
However, those on the other side of the issue see things developing differently on the U.S./Mexico border.
Andy Ramirez, founder of the Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council a nonprofit organization based in Southern California has been investigating and evaluating U.S. Border Security, Homeland Security, and international policies that he says do not benefit U.S. Citizens.
He has testified on a number of occasions before Congressional Committees as well as briefed numerous Members of Congress as to the facts he has uncovered from 2005 through today.
“The Clinton Administration set things in motion with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which put trade and commerce above national security and really got things going,” Ramirez said. “The George W. Bush Administration then paid lip service to Americans by allowing more Border Patrol Agents to be hired, and other improvements to border security with an actual fence, and virtual fence, along with other expensive toys.”
But those were surface improvements, which did nothing but allow the Bush Administration to make claims that were completely disingenuous. “The reality is that not only did W's Administration further compromise U.S. National Security by allowing Mexico to blackmail the U.S. Government due to the House of Death case. Mexico since then has dictated border security, immigration enforcement (and the lack thereof), and trade and economic policies that were only beneficial to Mexico,” Ramirez explained.
“The administration then further sold out U.S. Citizens by giving billions of dollars to Mexico under the Merida initiative. This treaty, which has not been formally approved by the U.S. Senate has allowed the well documented Mexican Government to be given not just cash but also specific training needed, which they have used to secure their southern border with Central America AND used to stage military, narco-terrorist, and human trafficking incursions along the U.S. - Mexico border.”
Keep in mind Bush had to keep one constituency of his stated political party happy, the conservatives, by paying lip service to border security, according to Ramirez. “Bush was unsuccessful to completely implement what I call a North American Union beyond signed but unratified treaties with Mexico and Canada, and unsuccessful in attempts to enact an amnesty under the so-called guise of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Obama like McCain pandered to the supporters of Comprehensive Immigration Reform like the National Council of La Raza and other known supporters of the Mexican Governments goal of "reconquista" meaning the reconquering of the Southwest for their mythical land of Aztlan.”
However, in evaluating what it taking place by reviewing the structure of Homeland Security as well as the policies of a number of past administrations, it is clear that all that is needed to be in place to pull this off is now there today.
“Obama does not need to give an amnesty since he has cut the budget at the Department of Homeland Security for all aspects of national security except management where we saw an increase of funds. What further helps is that the Customs service, and the Border Patrol have been compromised from within.”
“Managers who disagreed were purged out between 2005 and 2007, and today's managers have gone along to get along and are now in place along the borders and in between the ports of entry,” says Ramirez.
By systematically erasing the border, amnesty is no longer necessary, as the border for the hemisphere will now begin at the Mexican Border with Central America.
“Bersin's recent comments in San Diego completely corroborates what I came to realize some time ago,” he concludes.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The forum started rather interesting as Bersin added a disclaimer – in discussing this topic we should be focused on the future of immigration and port security not the past. Translation, the U.S. doesn’t want to talk about the drug cartel violence in Mexico, the lack of border security at the border or immigration crisis currently gripping the country.
After the forum Bersin took four questions from the media, three were asked and answered in Spanish while only one was in English. The event was held in a Chapel at Point Loma Nazarene University with approximately 200 college professionals and community business leaders.
Bersin’s speech centered on keeping the lanes moving across the border ports of entry, the implementation or increase of SENTRY program applicants (A fast-track lane used by those who America trusts and have passed background checks) and sharing information with Mexican counterparts.
“We have to pre-clear more of the trucking lines,” Bersin said. “It’s something I call the new bargain. Neither Mexicans or Americans like to share information with their government it’s built into the DNA of our culture…with technology we can change that,” he said.
The CBP head honcho tried to relay a message to the audience that America is lucky to not have the spillover violence, especially since Mexico is in the middle of a narco-war.
“We don’t have the spillover violence like Mexico is facing with the drug cartels...We don’t have that spillover in violence in the streets… so I think people are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the kind of political reaction that can generate a law like the Arizona law based on a couple of incidents that are tragic.”
Bersin took a page from the Obama press conference book and took only a few questions and provided lengthy wandering answers putting many in the audience to sleep.
The crime he talked about was in very general terms and steered cleared of the drug cartel violence that is taking thousands of Mexican lives each year. “We take seriously the crime directed against people in the United States as a result of organized crime,” Bersin quipped.
He also said that American’s have a terrific opportunity to improve trade relations with Mexico.
“The port of the future should have more integrated help with Mexico, “ Bersin claimed. “When it comes to where our department is going I say Si Su Pueda…”
However, Bersin did touch on the danger in “Mexico…aside from my duty to protect American people and my CBP agents upper most thing on my mind is their safety, we notify them of the danger, give them the best equipment, sharing information, we understand the danger.”
While Bersin may have been repeating some of the politically correct highlights voters have come to expect it was clear from the onset Bersin was in lock step with the Obama Administration.
The commissioner promised the attendees a three-legged approach to immigration was forthcoming; securing the border (this has been promised dating back to President Reagan), removing those who have committed crimes and developing secure legal flow of migrant workers.
It is this attitude that has the majority of Americans solidly against amnesty. “We hear promises, promises from political leaders ‘we’ll secure the border and slow those crossing’ each time they repeat it their words have no meaning,” said Sandy Jones. “We want action on the border before we commit to anything going forward.”
A recent Glenn Beck show, pointed out the majority of American’s feel reciprocal immigration laws should apply. When a foreign traveler enters Mexico, according to Mexico’s Population Law (article 67) they must abide by Mexico’s law which states; “Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues.”
Similar laws in the European Union are enforced everyday without the cries of Nazism. “Why the double standard,” Jones says.
There is no doubt immigration reform will be tough due to the many differing opinions on solutions and the Obama Administration seems content with flip flopping on the immigration reform issue day-to-day. Obama has opening criticized Arizona’s new law and then turned around and told Americans he didn’t feel their was a “political appetite” for immigration reform in the middle of tough midterm reelections this year.
Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer has responded swiftly to the Presidents’ criticism of the new law. At the recent correspondents dinner hosted by the White House for the who’s who in the media world, the President took a big swipe at Arizona by saying, “We all know what happens in Arizona if you don’t have ID, adios amigos.”
Needless to say the Governor doesn’t feel the administrations lack of knowledge and response to the plight of Arizona is a laughing matter. She has told reporters there have been five letters written to the White House and former Arizona Governor and now Secretary of DHS Janet Napolitano – all have gone unanswered. To view the new ad Brewer’s office has placed on the Internet, click on this link and play the ad. (Arizona Governor Jan Brewer new ad)
Attorney General Eric Holder chimed in on the Sunday shows and he doesn’t believe Arizona's law on illegal immigrants is racially motivated, but said it could lead law enforcement to racial profiling. He went on to say the country’s immigration problem couldn’t be fixed in a “state-by-state solution.”
The U.S. Attorney said he understood the frustration in Arizona, but he said on ABC's This Week "we could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done."
However, those on the other side of the issue see things developing differently on the U.S./Mexico border.
Andy Ramirez, founder of the Law Enforcement Officers Advocates Council a nonprofit organization based in Southern California has been investigating and evaluating U.S. Border Security, Homeland Security, and international policies that he says do not benefit U.S. Citizens.
He has testified on a number of occasions before Congressional Committees as well as briefed numerous Members of Congress as to the facts he has uncovered from 2005 through today.
“The Clinton Administration set things in motion with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which put trade and commerce above national security and really got things going,” Ramirez said. “The George W. Bush Administration then paid lip service to Americans by allowing more Border Patrol Agents to be hired, and other improvements to border security with an actual fence, and virtual fence, along with other expensive toys.”
But those were surface improvements, which did nothing but allow the Bush Administration to make claims that were completely disingenuous. “The reality is that not only did W's Administration further compromise U.S. National Security by allowing Mexico to blackmail the U.S. Government due to the House of Death case. Mexico since then has dictated border security, immigration enforcement (and the lack thereof), and trade and economic policies that were only beneficial to Mexico,” Ramirez explained.
“The administration then further sold out U.S. Citizens by giving billions of dollars to Mexico under the Merida initiative. This treaty, which has not been formally approved by the U.S. Senate has allowed the well documented Mexican Government to be given not just cash but also specific training needed, which they have used to secure their southern border with Central America AND used to stage military, narco-terrorist, and human trafficking incursions along the U.S. - Mexico border.”
Keep in mind Bush had to keep one constituency of his stated political party happy, the conservatives, by paying lip service to border security, according to Ramirez. “Bush was unsuccessful to completely implement what I call a North American Union beyond signed but unratified treaties with Mexico and Canada, and unsuccessful in attempts to enact an amnesty under the so-called guise of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Obama like McCain pandered to the supporters of Comprehensive Immigration Reform like the National Council of La Raza and other known supporters of the Mexican Governments goal of "reconquista" meaning the reconquering of the Southwest for their mythical land of Aztlan.”
However, in evaluating what it taking place by reviewing the structure of Homeland Security as well as the policies of a number of past administrations, it is clear that all that is needed to be in place to pull this off is now there today.
“Obama does not need to give an amnesty since he has cut the budget at the Department of Homeland Security for all aspects of national security except management where we saw an increase of funds. What further helps is that the Customs service, and the Border Patrol have been compromised from within.”
“Managers who disagreed were purged out between 2005 and 2007, and today's managers have gone along to get along and are now in place along the borders and in between the ports of entry,” says Ramirez.
By systematically erasing the border, amnesty is no longer necessary, as the border for the hemisphere will now begin at the Mexican Border with Central America.
“Bersin's recent comments in San Diego completely corroborates what I came to realize some time ago,” he concludes.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Sunday, May 9, 2010
San Diego Unified School district moves to warn students about Arizona's new law
In a daring and controversial move the San Diego Unified School District Board of Education looks to warn K-12 students about traveling to Arizona where a tough new immigration law recently passed.
The resolution was drawn up by SDUSD Board of Education President Richard Barrera and contains language condemning Arizona’s new illegal alien legislation and demanding the governor rescind the law immediately.
The resolution encourages students and parents not to spend time in Arizona, “due to the risk they may face in being subjected to inappropriate and unlawful scrutiny.”
The Arizona law set off a firestorm of rhetoric on both sides of the issue; however, the tough stance on illegal immigration finds favor both locally and nationally according to a Rasmussen poll. In Arizona, 70 percent favor the law to bring down crime that is burdening the state. Nationally, more than 60 percent approve of the new law.
After San Diego’s City Council voted last week to condemn Arizona’s new law and sent a letter to Governor Jan Brewer, apparently the SDUSD school board feels empowered to warn children about the political landscape the country faces during a lingering recession.
Jeff Schwilk, founder of the San Diego Minutemen called Barrera's proposed resolution outrageous. "Like the San Diego City Council last week, Mr. Barrera is sticking his nose into a political issue that has nothing to do with the school district. If Barrera really cares about the safety of our children, he should focus on warning them and their parents about the physical dangers of traveling to war-torn Mexico, just a few miles south of San Diego. With the new law in place, Arizona will be a much safer place to visit for all American citizens," Schwilk said.
The vote is set to take place on Tuesday night and claims that 44 percent of its student body is Hispanic and could be affected if they travel to Arizona.
The resolution also claims these students may “be targeted and harassed by law enforcement officials in Arizona as ‘reasonably suspect’ if they fall into a stereotype held by law enforcement officers.”
However, Arizona’s new law says nothing about targeting children and confirms law enforcement officers can only approach people if they’ve broken the law in some way. Examples of this could be speeding in a car, running a stop sign or robbing a bank. If people and children follow the law there will be no problems in Arizona or any other state.
Nevertheless, the School Board says; “`The law undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties, and poses a special threat to people of color who live in and travel through Arizona.”
Parents of school age children feel differently. “Since when did the public school district feel the need to involve children in a political topic that has nothing to do with them and will only deter them from learning,” explained Becky Schuler a parent. “California’s schools are some of the worst in the country and this is just another example of why the kids are failing to learn San Diego.”
San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio was the only member who dissented against the City Council resolution.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The resolution was drawn up by SDUSD Board of Education President Richard Barrera and contains language condemning Arizona’s new illegal alien legislation and demanding the governor rescind the law immediately.
The resolution encourages students and parents not to spend time in Arizona, “due to the risk they may face in being subjected to inappropriate and unlawful scrutiny.”
The Arizona law set off a firestorm of rhetoric on both sides of the issue; however, the tough stance on illegal immigration finds favor both locally and nationally according to a Rasmussen poll. In Arizona, 70 percent favor the law to bring down crime that is burdening the state. Nationally, more than 60 percent approve of the new law.
After San Diego’s City Council voted last week to condemn Arizona’s new law and sent a letter to Governor Jan Brewer, apparently the SDUSD school board feels empowered to warn children about the political landscape the country faces during a lingering recession.
Jeff Schwilk, founder of the San Diego Minutemen called Barrera's proposed resolution outrageous. "Like the San Diego City Council last week, Mr. Barrera is sticking his nose into a political issue that has nothing to do with the school district. If Barrera really cares about the safety of our children, he should focus on warning them and their parents about the physical dangers of traveling to war-torn Mexico, just a few miles south of San Diego. With the new law in place, Arizona will be a much safer place to visit for all American citizens," Schwilk said.
The vote is set to take place on Tuesday night and claims that 44 percent of its student body is Hispanic and could be affected if they travel to Arizona.
The resolution also claims these students may “be targeted and harassed by law enforcement officials in Arizona as ‘reasonably suspect’ if they fall into a stereotype held by law enforcement officers.”
However, Arizona’s new law says nothing about targeting children and confirms law enforcement officers can only approach people if they’ve broken the law in some way. Examples of this could be speeding in a car, running a stop sign or robbing a bank. If people and children follow the law there will be no problems in Arizona or any other state.
Nevertheless, the School Board says; “`The law undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties, and poses a special threat to people of color who live in and travel through Arizona.”
Parents of school age children feel differently. “Since when did the public school district feel the need to involve children in a political topic that has nothing to do with them and will only deter them from learning,” explained Becky Schuler a parent. “California’s schools are some of the worst in the country and this is just another example of why the kids are failing to learn San Diego.”
San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio was the only member who dissented against the City Council resolution.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Thursday, May 6, 2010
California's governor race shows signs of a Scott Brown-like victory for Poizner
With GOP Senator Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts as inspiration, Steve Poizner’s campaign has risen from the dead and pulled within 10 points of Meg Whitman in the Republican primary race for governor.
While the numbers come from internal polling, the outfit providing the intel is none other than Senator Scott Brown’s public polling firm. The numbers demonstrate “how fluid the race is,” said Neil Newhouse of Public Opinion Strategies.
The polling concluded on Tuesday and demonstrated that the 800 likely Republican voters were taking a second look at Poizner. Approximately 38 percent said they would vote for Whitman, while 28 percent favored Poizner and 30 percent were undecided. Just over a month ago Whitman led by nearly 50 points.
Newhouse said that outside the San Francisco Bay Area, Whitman’s lead is cut to five points, 35 to 30 percent with a month to go until the primary election. “This race is eerily similar to the Brown, Coakley race,” he said.
“Where we are running our messaging, we have closed from 48 points down to five points. Meg, the marketing expert, needs a refresher course because she probably could have spent less than $70 million to lose 43 points, but at least she provided a bailout for her political consultants who she needs to remind her of her deeply held beliefs,” said Team Poizner Communications Director Jarrod Agen. “We all know Meg went on a climate change cruise with Van Jones and Jimmy Carter, now she’s become the most expensive melting glacier in political history.”
The California Republican governor’s race has now shown signs of life and with 30 days until voters hit the booth, Poizner’s camp says the energy has shifted in their favor.
“Our poll shows that Meg Whitman’s lead over Steve Poizner, which we measured at 59%-11% in February, has closed to 38%-28%, with Whitman holding just a ten-point lead,” Agen explains. “Further, it’s important to note that even though Whitman has spent considerable resources in the area, Steve has not yet aggressively advertised in the San Francisco Bay Area market. “
Poizner’s camp explains that like the Scott Brown race in Massachusetts; ”this race has been largely misunderstood by the media. Campaigns, especially primary campaigns, and especially in large states like California, are seldom won three or four months out from election day.”
With the President discussing the immigration issue at a White House Cinco de Mayo event and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano saying the Democrats are “focused on the border like a laser,” a fair question for Poizner is the immigration issue that has exploded across the nation.
“The federal government has not done enough to end illegal immigration, leaving states like Arizona and California to take fend for themselves,” said Team Poizner’s Agen. “Like Meg Whitman, President Obama has called for an amnesty plan that allows illegal immigrants to pay a fine, go to the back of the line, and become citizens. Steve Poizner strongly opposes amnesty and he is the only candidate in this race that is willing to make ending illegal immigration a top priority.”
Since Arizona passed its tough new illegal immigration law, many California cities have decided to boycott or denounce Arizona. Poizner says he would ‘get tough’ on the issue in California if were governor.
“Steve supports Arizona’s new law, which takes a bold approach to dealing with illegal immigration while making it crystal clear that racial profiling is both illegal and wrong. Arizona has acted because the federal government has failed to secure our borders,” Agen said. “It is time for California to do the same and, as governor, Steve pledges to make stopping illegal immigration one of his highest priorities. He has detailed a bold plan to address the crisis, which includes cutting off taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens, employing state resources to help secure our borders, ending sanctuary cities, and cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens”
Poizner points out while Whitman and her liberal allies in Congress want to reward illegal aliens with a 'pathway to citizenship,' he has just two words: ‘No Amnesty.’
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
While the numbers come from internal polling, the outfit providing the intel is none other than Senator Scott Brown’s public polling firm. The numbers demonstrate “how fluid the race is,” said Neil Newhouse of Public Opinion Strategies.
The polling concluded on Tuesday and demonstrated that the 800 likely Republican voters were taking a second look at Poizner. Approximately 38 percent said they would vote for Whitman, while 28 percent favored Poizner and 30 percent were undecided. Just over a month ago Whitman led by nearly 50 points.
Newhouse said that outside the San Francisco Bay Area, Whitman’s lead is cut to five points, 35 to 30 percent with a month to go until the primary election. “This race is eerily similar to the Brown, Coakley race,” he said.
“Where we are running our messaging, we have closed from 48 points down to five points. Meg, the marketing expert, needs a refresher course because she probably could have spent less than $70 million to lose 43 points, but at least she provided a bailout for her political consultants who she needs to remind her of her deeply held beliefs,” said Team Poizner Communications Director Jarrod Agen. “We all know Meg went on a climate change cruise with Van Jones and Jimmy Carter, now she’s become the most expensive melting glacier in political history.”
The California Republican governor’s race has now shown signs of life and with 30 days until voters hit the booth, Poizner’s camp says the energy has shifted in their favor.
“Our poll shows that Meg Whitman’s lead over Steve Poizner, which we measured at 59%-11% in February, has closed to 38%-28%, with Whitman holding just a ten-point lead,” Agen explains. “Further, it’s important to note that even though Whitman has spent considerable resources in the area, Steve has not yet aggressively advertised in the San Francisco Bay Area market. “
Poizner’s camp explains that like the Scott Brown race in Massachusetts; ”this race has been largely misunderstood by the media. Campaigns, especially primary campaigns, and especially in large states like California, are seldom won three or four months out from election day.”
With the President discussing the immigration issue at a White House Cinco de Mayo event and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano saying the Democrats are “focused on the border like a laser,” a fair question for Poizner is the immigration issue that has exploded across the nation.
“The federal government has not done enough to end illegal immigration, leaving states like Arizona and California to take fend for themselves,” said Team Poizner’s Agen. “Like Meg Whitman, President Obama has called for an amnesty plan that allows illegal immigrants to pay a fine, go to the back of the line, and become citizens. Steve Poizner strongly opposes amnesty and he is the only candidate in this race that is willing to make ending illegal immigration a top priority.”
Since Arizona passed its tough new illegal immigration law, many California cities have decided to boycott or denounce Arizona. Poizner says he would ‘get tough’ on the issue in California if were governor.
“Steve supports Arizona’s new law, which takes a bold approach to dealing with illegal immigration while making it crystal clear that racial profiling is both illegal and wrong. Arizona has acted because the federal government has failed to secure our borders,” Agen said. “It is time for California to do the same and, as governor, Steve pledges to make stopping illegal immigration one of his highest priorities. He has detailed a bold plan to address the crisis, which includes cutting off taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens, employing state resources to help secure our borders, ending sanctuary cities, and cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens”
Poizner points out while Whitman and her liberal allies in Congress want to reward illegal aliens with a 'pathway to citizenship,' he has just two words: ‘No Amnesty.’
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
May Day Rally videos show many are ill informed about immigration
Thousands of Americans and immigrants marched across the country on Saturday; many were celebrating the traditional May Day activities including traditional dancers. However the real story may be the fact those chanting against Arizona’s new immigration law were misinformed.
Camera crews were out in earnest filming the May Day events and calling attention to many aspects of the supposed anti-immigration law American’s in Arizona want on the books. This point can easily be diffused when voters look to the polling on the issue.
In a USA Today/Gallup Poll, 61 percent are very concerned about illegal immigration and the government’s inability to secure the border.
The number increases to eight in 10 citizens who believe illegal immigrants are an added burden to hospitals, schools and other public welfare programs during a deep recession. Another 77 percent are concerned illegal immigrants will push hourly wages lower.
In California, the porous borders make it easy for pregnant women to enter the country illegally and put a significant burden on the hospitals who take in the birthing mothers.
This cost is significant, according to Dr. Gary Gonsalves, who also co-founded StopTaxingUs, a taxpayer advocacy group. “Approximately 107,000 illegal immigrant women will have babies each year in California on the taxpayer dime,” he says. “Of those, 33 percent will need C-sections at $20,000 per baby and 12 percent will have premature babies at a cost of $165,000 per baby.”
The tab for just childbirth reaches past $2 billion per year in the state of California. It is also estimated that California pays out upwards of $10 billion per year in other programs for illegal immigrants and their children.
California is also broke - $20 billion or more in the red.
Groups like NumbersUSA are manning the phones and loading their websites with all the statistical information concerned voters need to arm themselves with the facts. Just as the main- stream media took to the streets and grabbed sound bites, NumbersUSA’s Chad McDonald filmed the rallies looking to see why folks were so angry.
This is what he found;
You Tube Videos
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DPhAk9HIdU
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-8Ex2HQ9mM
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZxANkEFbQI
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Camera crews were out in earnest filming the May Day events and calling attention to many aspects of the supposed anti-immigration law American’s in Arizona want on the books. This point can easily be diffused when voters look to the polling on the issue.
In a USA Today/Gallup Poll, 61 percent are very concerned about illegal immigration and the government’s inability to secure the border.
The number increases to eight in 10 citizens who believe illegal immigrants are an added burden to hospitals, schools and other public welfare programs during a deep recession. Another 77 percent are concerned illegal immigrants will push hourly wages lower.
In California, the porous borders make it easy for pregnant women to enter the country illegally and put a significant burden on the hospitals who take in the birthing mothers.
This cost is significant, according to Dr. Gary Gonsalves, who also co-founded StopTaxingUs, a taxpayer advocacy group. “Approximately 107,000 illegal immigrant women will have babies each year in California on the taxpayer dime,” he says. “Of those, 33 percent will need C-sections at $20,000 per baby and 12 percent will have premature babies at a cost of $165,000 per baby.”
The tab for just childbirth reaches past $2 billion per year in the state of California. It is also estimated that California pays out upwards of $10 billion per year in other programs for illegal immigrants and their children.
California is also broke - $20 billion or more in the red.
Groups like NumbersUSA are manning the phones and loading their websites with all the statistical information concerned voters need to arm themselves with the facts. Just as the main- stream media took to the streets and grabbed sound bites, NumbersUSA’s Chad McDonald filmed the rallies looking to see why folks were so angry.
This is what he found;
You Tube Videos
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DPhAk9HIdU
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-8Ex2HQ9mM
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZxANkEFbQI
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
San Diego City Council denounces Arizona's new immigration law
In an ongoing trend in local and national government, politicians are voting in a manner that their constituents do not favor. They appear to abide by a new political correctness; “we know better than you what the rules should be.”
First voters watched their lawmakers defy their wishes on health care and now local municipalities are addressing Arizona’s illegal immigration policy. The city of San Diego is the latest city voting to send a resolution to Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer to repeal the new immigration legislation she signed into law.
In a stunning turn of politics the San Diego City Council decided they knew better than the wants of its residents and in a 7-1 vote they abdicated Arizona.
A Channel 10 News poll found the majority of San Diegans support Arizona’s new law, 51 percent favor it while 33 percent oppose and 15 percent do not care. On the local radio Rick Robert’s show approximately 97 percent agree with Arizona’s tough new legislation and only three percent do not.
Now that immigration is front and center on the television screen many who do not know what Mexico’s illegal immigration policy can now read closely. First illegal immigration is a felony punishable by up to two years in Mexican prison and if you attempt to re-enter the country law-breakers can expect up to 10 years in jail.
Mexico will deport foreigners it deems detrimental to their economic livelihood, who is not healthy and anyone who can’t take care of themselves, according to the Washington Times.
San Diego Council President Ben Hueso, who wanted the resolution, says he supports immigration reform and protecting the nation's border, but said Arizona's law as detrimental to national unity.
“This law threatens to divide our union,” said Hueso. “I believe it violates the Constitution. It victimizes legal residents as well as those who are here in the country illegally. And, it discourages the victims of crimes in the immigrant community to access justice.”
The lone dissenting vote came from Councilman Carl DeMaio, who didn’t blame Arizona from wanting to protect its residents from an illegal immigrant invasion, many of whom have criminal backgrounds or ties to the Mexican drug cartels.
“I cannot support the resolution as introduced, as it does not accurately reflect the Arizona state law as amended under HB 2162,'' DeMaio explained. “Moreover, the resolution as introduced fails to call the federal government to task for its failure to secure our nation's borders.”
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the Senate Bill into law on April 23, and it makes it illegal to be in the state without acceptable identification and it authorizes local law enforcement to investigate a person's immigration status during other routine law enforcement activities.
Brewer says she will “not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.”
On Friday, the governor signed an amendment to the original bill, which will bar race from being considered when inquiring about legal status.
“These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal and will not be tolerated in Arizona,'' Brewer said.
However, Councilwoman Marti Emerald said the amendment is nothing more than a facade.
“In my mind, this house bill is a smokescreen by people who really do support racial profiling, and it would be totally unnecessary if the Arizona state government would repeal 1070,” Emerald said.
In a Rasmussen Poll taken last week said, 70 percent of Arizonans favor the tough new law as a way to rein in the crime the state is succumbing to on a daily basis.
San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne said he does not agree with the new Arizona law and felt it would lead the community to distrust law enforcement community and could lead to racial profiling.
“If we change that policy, it would be my belief that the community would no longer trust us and they would not report those crimes and we would not be able to adequately and effectively police the city of San Diego,'' says Lansdowne.
However, many law enforcement agencies in Arizona favor the new law and hope it will discourage future illegal immigrants from crossing the border illegally and staying in a state that is over burdened with financially strained public service programs.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said in a statement that he would sign the City Council resolution.
“It's not the job of our police department to solve the federal government's immigration problem,'' Sanders said. “As a former police chief, I know what we ask of our officers every day with our limited city resources, and their first priority is to protect our citizens.''
In true Tea Party fashion groups have began email blasts to American’s calling for a national Arizona ‘buy-cott.’
“Starting May 5th, we are officially kicking off an on-going Arizona buy-cott to support Arizona bases corporations, local businesses, on-line retailers, and tourism. Our site will list a sampling of the great companies you can support...and there is something for everyone,” say the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition in San Diego Dawn Wildman.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
First voters watched their lawmakers defy their wishes on health care and now local municipalities are addressing Arizona’s illegal immigration policy. The city of San Diego is the latest city voting to send a resolution to Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer to repeal the new immigration legislation she signed into law.
In a stunning turn of politics the San Diego City Council decided they knew better than the wants of its residents and in a 7-1 vote they abdicated Arizona.
A Channel 10 News poll found the majority of San Diegans support Arizona’s new law, 51 percent favor it while 33 percent oppose and 15 percent do not care. On the local radio Rick Robert’s show approximately 97 percent agree with Arizona’s tough new legislation and only three percent do not.
Now that immigration is front and center on the television screen many who do not know what Mexico’s illegal immigration policy can now read closely. First illegal immigration is a felony punishable by up to two years in Mexican prison and if you attempt to re-enter the country law-breakers can expect up to 10 years in jail.
Mexico will deport foreigners it deems detrimental to their economic livelihood, who is not healthy and anyone who can’t take care of themselves, according to the Washington Times.
San Diego Council President Ben Hueso, who wanted the resolution, says he supports immigration reform and protecting the nation's border, but said Arizona's law as detrimental to national unity.
“This law threatens to divide our union,” said Hueso. “I believe it violates the Constitution. It victimizes legal residents as well as those who are here in the country illegally. And, it discourages the victims of crimes in the immigrant community to access justice.”
The lone dissenting vote came from Councilman Carl DeMaio, who didn’t blame Arizona from wanting to protect its residents from an illegal immigrant invasion, many of whom have criminal backgrounds or ties to the Mexican drug cartels.
“I cannot support the resolution as introduced, as it does not accurately reflect the Arizona state law as amended under HB 2162,'' DeMaio explained. “Moreover, the resolution as introduced fails to call the federal government to task for its failure to secure our nation's borders.”
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the Senate Bill into law on April 23, and it makes it illegal to be in the state without acceptable identification and it authorizes local law enforcement to investigate a person's immigration status during other routine law enforcement activities.
Brewer says she will “not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.”
On Friday, the governor signed an amendment to the original bill, which will bar race from being considered when inquiring about legal status.
“These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal and will not be tolerated in Arizona,'' Brewer said.
However, Councilwoman Marti Emerald said the amendment is nothing more than a facade.
“In my mind, this house bill is a smokescreen by people who really do support racial profiling, and it would be totally unnecessary if the Arizona state government would repeal 1070,” Emerald said.
In a Rasmussen Poll taken last week said, 70 percent of Arizonans favor the tough new law as a way to rein in the crime the state is succumbing to on a daily basis.
San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne said he does not agree with the new Arizona law and felt it would lead the community to distrust law enforcement community and could lead to racial profiling.
“If we change that policy, it would be my belief that the community would no longer trust us and they would not report those crimes and we would not be able to adequately and effectively police the city of San Diego,'' says Lansdowne.
However, many law enforcement agencies in Arizona favor the new law and hope it will discourage future illegal immigrants from crossing the border illegally and staying in a state that is over burdened with financially strained public service programs.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said in a statement that he would sign the City Council resolution.
“It's not the job of our police department to solve the federal government's immigration problem,'' Sanders said. “As a former police chief, I know what we ask of our officers every day with our limited city resources, and their first priority is to protect our citizens.''
In true Tea Party fashion groups have began email blasts to American’s calling for a national Arizona ‘buy-cott.’
“Starting May 5th, we are officially kicking off an on-going Arizona buy-cott to support Arizona bases corporations, local businesses, on-line retailers, and tourism. Our site will list a sampling of the great companies you can support...and there is something for everyone,” say the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition in San Diego Dawn Wildman.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Monday, May 3, 2010
No more taxes is the call from Americans when it comes to the deficit
With tax day still looming in the rearview mirror, it appears the American taxpayer is not feeling very giving when it comes to the Uncle Sam.
A new Rasmussen Report poll finds 69 percent of Americans are not in favor of higher taxes to pay down the ballooning deficit. The new poll finds that only 18 percent of taxpayers are willing to shell out more money to the Federal Reserve in order to pay down the country’s bloated deficit.
An overwhelming number of Americans would rather see Congress curtail their
spending habits instead of reaching their sticky fingers into taxpayer pocketbooks. With many entitlement programs running in the red, either higher taxes or severe spending cuts are on the horizon.
However, Rasmussen found that most voters believe President Obama’s bipartisan debt reduction commission will recommend tax hikes rather than spending cuts. The poll also disclosed that if the panel suggests tax increases, 78 percent believe Congress will raise taxes across the board.
The results also showed that men were twice as likely to accept a tax hike compared to women.
A staggering 83 percent of Americans believe the growing size of the national deficit has more to do with an addiction to spending by Congress and the reluctance of Americans to foot the ever-increasing tab.
While 66 percent of taxpayers think they are already overtaxed, 46 percent fully expect their taxes to go up under the Obama Administration in the coming years.
The higher taxes trend will only be exacerbated as more details trickle out of the health care package. Most American’s think the President’s new health care bill will raise the deficits as a result 58 percent feel lawmakers should repeal the bill. In the long-term taxpayers indicate the recession is placing enough of a burden on their family and want the other guy to foot the bill.
Estimates from nonpartisan groups like the Urban Institute or Tax Policy Center point out that if the federal government does not curtail spending it would take taxing those making more than $200,000 per year 77 to 91 percent to bring the deficits to reasonable levels of 2 to 3 percent of GDP, but this drastic measure would not erase the country’s debt.
This last option seems highly unlikely as folks making that kind of money would simply leave the country or quit their jobs. The fact is that nearly half of Americans pay no income tax and this is already a sour point with taxpayers who just wrote their yearly Internal Revenue Service (IRS) checks.
Looking forward to next year’s tax bill one thing is certain, this year will most likely be the last respite families will see from taxes for many years to come.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
A new Rasmussen Report poll finds 69 percent of Americans are not in favor of higher taxes to pay down the ballooning deficit. The new poll finds that only 18 percent of taxpayers are willing to shell out more money to the Federal Reserve in order to pay down the country’s bloated deficit.
An overwhelming number of Americans would rather see Congress curtail their
spending habits instead of reaching their sticky fingers into taxpayer pocketbooks. With many entitlement programs running in the red, either higher taxes or severe spending cuts are on the horizon.
However, Rasmussen found that most voters believe President Obama’s bipartisan debt reduction commission will recommend tax hikes rather than spending cuts. The poll also disclosed that if the panel suggests tax increases, 78 percent believe Congress will raise taxes across the board.
The results also showed that men were twice as likely to accept a tax hike compared to women.
A staggering 83 percent of Americans believe the growing size of the national deficit has more to do with an addiction to spending by Congress and the reluctance of Americans to foot the ever-increasing tab.
While 66 percent of taxpayers think they are already overtaxed, 46 percent fully expect their taxes to go up under the Obama Administration in the coming years.
The higher taxes trend will only be exacerbated as more details trickle out of the health care package. Most American’s think the President’s new health care bill will raise the deficits as a result 58 percent feel lawmakers should repeal the bill. In the long-term taxpayers indicate the recession is placing enough of a burden on their family and want the other guy to foot the bill.
Estimates from nonpartisan groups like the Urban Institute or Tax Policy Center point out that if the federal government does not curtail spending it would take taxing those making more than $200,000 per year 77 to 91 percent to bring the deficits to reasonable levels of 2 to 3 percent of GDP, but this drastic measure would not erase the country’s debt.
This last option seems highly unlikely as folks making that kind of money would simply leave the country or quit their jobs. The fact is that nearly half of Americans pay no income tax and this is already a sour point with taxpayers who just wrote their yearly Internal Revenue Service (IRS) checks.
Looking forward to next year’s tax bill one thing is certain, this year will most likely be the last respite families will see from taxes for many years to come.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Saturday, May 1, 2010
May Day rallies spark renewed immigration debate
Thousands of protesters attended rallies across the country in a renewed effort to
bring illegal immigration reform front and center for the White House. There were no reports of violence, but several arrests had taken place including Illinois Congressman, Luis Gutierrez and 40 others for civil disobedience outside the White House.
In San Diego the number of protesters at two rallies were far less than expected. At Chicano Park roughly 400-500 demonstrators watched the May Day festivities.
One San Diego resident, Leticia Singer said she came out to support the Latino community. “I’m originally from Mexico City, Mexico. I immigrated here legally 25 years ago,” she said. “I’m here to protest the new Arizona law because I think it is unjust.”
Keywords Singer uses are ‘immigrated legally.’ Most Americans don’t have a problem with legal immigration in fact they prefer those seeking to enter the country come through the ‘front door.’
Down the street another rally took place coined the ‘Pro American Rally.” These folks had fewer demonstrators as well as a different opinion on the immigration law in Arizona.
“We all have to do what we can to fight the illegal immigration,” said Lawren Sprague of San Diego. “I used to live in Arizona and they have some difficult issues with human trafficking and drug cartel violence.”
So why did she attend the rally this afternoon? “People need to get off the couch, speak up and use their platforms for citizen advocate rallies,” she said.
Back at Chicano Park, attendees were treated with traditional dancers and music. The crowds waved their Mexican and American flags and signs opposing the tough new immigration law in Arizona.
The Peace and Freedom Party posted this on their website regarding the May Day Rally at Chicano Park; “We are one people standing together against the oppression that is crushing all of us; legalization for all - without conditions; jobs, housing and livable wages for all; fund education and social services; not war; immigration rights for LGBT partners.”
However Congressional candidate, Mason Weaver had this to say about illegal immigration; “it’s okay to break into my house as long as you do the dishes. This is just wrong, come through the front door.”
Echoing a similar sentiment, Jay LaSuer who is running for San Diego Sheriff said, “I don’t want anymore hyphen-American. Either you support America 100 percent or find someplace else to call home.”
The Pro-America Rally organizer, Jeff Schwilk said the event went well. “We were able to get our message of legal immigration and pro-enforcement out to those who attended.”
Many of those who contend the Arizona law won’t pass muster once it hits the court system may be in for a surprise, according to Walter Moore an Arizona attorney.
In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled in United States v. Santana-Garcia, 264 F.3rd 1188, “that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit ‘have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,’ and that federal law as currently written does nothing ‘ to displace . . . state or local authority to arrest individuals violating federal immigration laws.’ On the contrary, the Court said, “federal law ‘evinces a clear invitation from Congress for state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws,’” Moore pointed out.
Also in 2008, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey concluded, in Rojas v. City of New Brunswick, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57974, that, “As a general matter, state and local law enforcement officers are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes. Where state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement activity is authorized. The Court accordingly held that a city and its police department had authority to investigate and arrest people for possible violations of federal immigration laws,” Moore said.
Moore insists there is case after case in courtrooms in a number of states that have upheld local law enforcement’s right to question folks about immigration status during lawful stops.
The nonsense making the airwaves coast to coast that Arizona Police and Sheriff officials will go door-to-door arresting illegal immigrants as they eat dinner are pure propaganda from the left. In fact, Arizona added some amendments to the new legislation to clarify certain aspects of the illegal immigration law.
As the May Day afternoon unfolded approximately 1,000 pro-amnesty protesters marched into downtown to show their angst with America’s lagging efforts when it comes to the immigration reform bill.
However, at the conclusion to the event, two “Pro-American Legal Immigration’ attendees were viciously attacked by the “Pro-Amnesty” supporters. The victims called police and filed a report stating that they were punched in the head and rocks were thrown at them. This was the only report of violence during the afternoon festivities.
One thing is certain the illegal immigration debate is sure to spark passion on both sides of the issue.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
bring illegal immigration reform front and center for the White House. There were no reports of violence, but several arrests had taken place including Illinois Congressman, Luis Gutierrez and 40 others for civil disobedience outside the White House.
In San Diego the number of protesters at two rallies were far less than expected. At Chicano Park roughly 400-500 demonstrators watched the May Day festivities.
One San Diego resident, Leticia Singer said she came out to support the Latino community. “I’m originally from Mexico City, Mexico. I immigrated here legally 25 years ago,” she said. “I’m here to protest the new Arizona law because I think it is unjust.”
Keywords Singer uses are ‘immigrated legally.’ Most Americans don’t have a problem with legal immigration in fact they prefer those seeking to enter the country come through the ‘front door.’
Down the street another rally took place coined the ‘Pro American Rally.” These folks had fewer demonstrators as well as a different opinion on the immigration law in Arizona.
“We all have to do what we can to fight the illegal immigration,” said Lawren Sprague of San Diego. “I used to live in Arizona and they have some difficult issues with human trafficking and drug cartel violence.”
So why did she attend the rally this afternoon? “People need to get off the couch, speak up and use their platforms for citizen advocate rallies,” she said.
Back at Chicano Park, attendees were treated with traditional dancers and music. The crowds waved their Mexican and American flags and signs opposing the tough new immigration law in Arizona.
The Peace and Freedom Party posted this on their website regarding the May Day Rally at Chicano Park; “We are one people standing together against the oppression that is crushing all of us; legalization for all - without conditions; jobs, housing and livable wages for all; fund education and social services; not war; immigration rights for LGBT partners.”
However Congressional candidate, Mason Weaver had this to say about illegal immigration; “it’s okay to break into my house as long as you do the dishes. This is just wrong, come through the front door.”
Echoing a similar sentiment, Jay LaSuer who is running for San Diego Sheriff said, “I don’t want anymore hyphen-American. Either you support America 100 percent or find someplace else to call home.”
The Pro-America Rally organizer, Jeff Schwilk said the event went well. “We were able to get our message of legal immigration and pro-enforcement out to those who attended.”
Many of those who contend the Arizona law won’t pass muster once it hits the court system may be in for a surprise, according to Walter Moore an Arizona attorney.
In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled in United States v. Santana-Garcia, 264 F.3rd 1188, “that state law enforcement officers within the Tenth Circuit ‘have the general authority to investigate and make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws,’ and that federal law as currently written does nothing ‘ to displace . . . state or local authority to arrest individuals violating federal immigration laws.’ On the contrary, the Court said, “federal law ‘evinces a clear invitation from Congress for state and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws,’” Moore pointed out.
Also in 2008, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey concluded, in Rojas v. City of New Brunswick, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57974, that, “As a general matter, state and local law enforcement officers are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes. Where state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement activity is authorized. The Court accordingly held that a city and its police department had authority to investigate and arrest people for possible violations of federal immigration laws,” Moore said.
Moore insists there is case after case in courtrooms in a number of states that have upheld local law enforcement’s right to question folks about immigration status during lawful stops.
The nonsense making the airwaves coast to coast that Arizona Police and Sheriff officials will go door-to-door arresting illegal immigrants as they eat dinner are pure propaganda from the left. In fact, Arizona added some amendments to the new legislation to clarify certain aspects of the illegal immigration law.
As the May Day afternoon unfolded approximately 1,000 pro-amnesty protesters marched into downtown to show their angst with America’s lagging efforts when it comes to the immigration reform bill.
However, at the conclusion to the event, two “Pro-American Legal Immigration’ attendees were viciously attacked by the “Pro-Amnesty” supporters. The victims called police and filed a report stating that they were punched in the head and rocks were thrown at them. This was the only report of violence during the afternoon festivities.
One thing is certain the illegal immigration debate is sure to spark passion on both sides of the issue.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
