Standing in front of Cinderella’s castle at Disney World in Orlando, President Obama declared another “can’t wait” executive order to boost tourism in the U.S. “This is the land where we do big things,” the President quipped in the Sunshine State.
It didn’t take long for GOP front-runner Mitt Romney to make light of the President’s Disney World location used to announce his new executive-order tourism plan. “Perhaps there’s some poetic justice in the President speaking from Fantasyland because I’m afraid, he’s been speaking from Fantasyland for some time now.”
Republican Presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich’s comments weren’t any nicer. “Obama was flanked by Donald Duck on one side and Goofy on the other, much like his cabinet.”
President Obama signed the executive order announcing new initiatives to increase travel and tourism in the United States. Currently the travel industry consists of approximately 2.7 percent of the U.S. GDP and represents 7.5 million jobs.
The “new” Obama executive order aims to create an additional 1 million jobs for the U.S. lagging economy over the next 10 years.
The administration’s announcement highlights a range of steps to promote America as a tourism destination and improve the secure visa processing process.
“Every year, tens of millions of tourists from all over the world come and visit America. And the more folks who visit America, the more Americans we get back to work. We need to help businesses all across the country grow and create jobs; compete and win. That’s how we’re going to rebuild an economy where hard work pays off, where responsibility is rewarded, and where anyone can make it if they try,” President Obama said.
The U.S. Department of Commerce claims that international travel accounted for $134 billion in U.S. exports in 2010.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis; “estimates that every additional 65 international visitors to the United States can generate enough exports to support an additional travel and tourism-related job. According to the travel industry and Bureau of Economic Analysis, international travel is particularly important as overseas or ‘long-haul’ travelers spend on average $4,000 on each visit.”
The new White House tourism strategy will focus on the emerging economies of China, Brazil and India. These three countries alone represented approximately $15 billion and thousands of jobs in 2010.
In addition, Chinese and Brazilian tourists spend between $5-6,000 per trip, according to the Department of Commerce.
In recent years, the Department of State has made progress in processing non-immigrant visas from key markets. Last fiscal year they processed 7.5 million visas. In the 2011 fiscal year, consular officers adjudicated more than one million visa applications in China, and 800,000 in Brazil.
-Some highlights of President Obama’s tourism Executive Order include;
The Secretaries of Commerce and the Interior will be charged with; Co-leading an interagency task force to develop recommendations for a National Travel & Tourism Strategy to promote domestic and international travel opportunities throughout the United States, thereby expanding job creation. This Task Force will coordinate with the Corporation for Travel Promotion (currently doing business as BrandUSA), a non-profit corporation established by Congress through the Travel Promotion Act of 2009 to promote travel to the United States and the Tourism Policy Council to ensure private sector participation and cross-agency coordination.
A focus of the Task Force will be on strategies for increasing tourism and recreation jobs by promoting visits to our national treasures. The Department of the Interior manages iconic destinations in national parks, wildlife refuges, cultural and historic sites, monuments and other public lands that attract travelers from around the country and the globe. In 2010, more than 400 million visits were made by American and international travelers to these lands, contributing nearly $50 billion in economic activity and 400,000 jobs. Eco-tourism and outdoor recreation also have an outsize impact on rural economies, particularly in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming.
The Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security will be charged with; increasing non-immigrant visa processing capacity in China and Brazil by 40 percent in 2012.
They will ensure that 80 percent of non-immigrant visa applicants be interviewed within three weeks of receipt of application.
Increasing efforts to expand the Visa Waiver Program and travel by nationals eligible to participate in the Visa Waiver Program, and expanding reciprocal trusted travel programs for expedited travel (such as the Global Entry program).
-Final Rule to Expand and Make the Global Entry Program Permanent:
Global Entry was a program within the U.S. Customs and Border Protection that was created in 2008 to facilitate expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United States. Through a final rule, the Administration will expand and make the Global Entry program permanent. Due in part to innovative public-private partnerships, the Global Entry program now has more than 246,000 members, more than 1 million trusted travelers have Global Entry benefits, and efforts are underway to expand enrollment even further. There are currently 131 Global Entry kiosks located at 20 airports. Members have used Global Entry kiosks more than 1.7 million times, saving CBP officers over 36,450 inspection hours—staff hours that CBP has then re-allocated to expedite regular passenger queues.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Obama lays out new plan to treat soldiers suffering TBI and PTSD
First Lady Michelle Obama and Jill Biden’s Joining Forces initiative, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) have created a new generation of doctors, medical schools and research facilities that will focus on treatment options for military veterans.
“I’m inspired to see our nation’s medical schools step up to address this pressing need for our veterans and military families,” First Lady Michelle Obama said. “By directing some of our brightest minds, our most cutting-edge research, and our finest teaching institutions toward our military families, they’re ensuring that those who have served our country receive the first-rate care that they have earned.”
While this new program is welcomed by injured military veterans, the signature war wounds for the signature Middle East Wars, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) have seen numerous successful treatment plans in the private sector.
Most recently Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head by a mentally unstable gunman. Rep. Giffords received the best medical treatment her generous Congressional health insurance provided. As a result, she has recovered at a remarkable pace. Many argue that the military veterans are not given the same opportunity as an elected politician.
Another example of successful head trauma treatment is ABC News reporter, Bob Woodruff. He survived a bomb blast covering the Iraq War. Mr. Woodruff, was treated for TBI in New York City, received excellent medical treatment in the private sector, and has returned to work.
Woodruff has spoken about his and Giffords’ head injuries. “First, there is hope. Like the doctors who saved me almost five years ago, her surgeons knew exactly what to do. Her brain was swelling just like mine. They removed partof her skull on the left sideof her head almost exactly like mine, and she (was put) in a drug-induced coma so that her brain could recover.”
However, complaints from many service members suggest military treatment requires excessive paperwork and bland treatment options for their TBI and PTSD injuries.
Together, the AAMC and AACOM hope to advance their veteran-related injury education programs, focus laboratory research, and improve clinical care for military families. This cooperative effort seeks to better address health issues suffered by returning troops from the Middle East Wars.
Specifically, these organizations will focus on the following;
· Train their medical students as well as their current physicians, faculty, and staff to better diagnose and treat our veterans and military families;
· Develop new research and clinical trials on PTSD and TBI so that we can better understand and treat those conditions;
· Share their information and best practices with one another through a collaborative web forum created by the AAMC; and
· Continue to work with the VA and the Department of Defense to make sure that everyone is providing the best care available.
“Because of our integrated missions in education, clinical care, and research, America’s medical schools are uniquely positioned to take a leadership role in this important effort,” Darrell G. Kirch M.D., president and CEO of the Association of American Medical Colleges said. “Medical schools have long recognized the sacrifice and commitment of our military, veterans, and their families. The relationship between the Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers and academic medicine dates back to the end of World War II and serves as a model for successful partnerships between public and private institutions. Our work with the White House on Joining Forces is a natural extension of our efforts in this area and renews our commitment to the wellness of our nation’s military.”
For more information about Joining Forces visit; www.joiningforces.gov
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
“I’m inspired to see our nation’s medical schools step up to address this pressing need for our veterans and military families,” First Lady Michelle Obama said. “By directing some of our brightest minds, our most cutting-edge research, and our finest teaching institutions toward our military families, they’re ensuring that those who have served our country receive the first-rate care that they have earned.”
While this new program is welcomed by injured military veterans, the signature war wounds for the signature Middle East Wars, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) have seen numerous successful treatment plans in the private sector.
Most recently Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head by a mentally unstable gunman. Rep. Giffords received the best medical treatment her generous Congressional health insurance provided. As a result, she has recovered at a remarkable pace. Many argue that the military veterans are not given the same opportunity as an elected politician.
Another example of successful head trauma treatment is ABC News reporter, Bob Woodruff. He survived a bomb blast covering the Iraq War. Mr. Woodruff, was treated for TBI in New York City, received excellent medical treatment in the private sector, and has returned to work.
Woodruff has spoken about his and Giffords’ head injuries. “First, there is hope. Like the doctors who saved me almost five years ago, her surgeons knew exactly what to do. Her brain was swelling just like mine. They removed partof her skull on the left sideof her head almost exactly like mine, and she (was put) in a drug-induced coma so that her brain could recover.”
However, complaints from many service members suggest military treatment requires excessive paperwork and bland treatment options for their TBI and PTSD injuries.
Together, the AAMC and AACOM hope to advance their veteran-related injury education programs, focus laboratory research, and improve clinical care for military families. This cooperative effort seeks to better address health issues suffered by returning troops from the Middle East Wars.
Specifically, these organizations will focus on the following;
· Train their medical students as well as their current physicians, faculty, and staff to better diagnose and treat our veterans and military families;
· Develop new research and clinical trials on PTSD and TBI so that we can better understand and treat those conditions;
· Share their information and best practices with one another through a collaborative web forum created by the AAMC; and
· Continue to work with the VA and the Department of Defense to make sure that everyone is providing the best care available.
“Because of our integrated missions in education, clinical care, and research, America’s medical schools are uniquely positioned to take a leadership role in this important effort,” Darrell G. Kirch M.D., president and CEO of the Association of American Medical Colleges said. “Medical schools have long recognized the sacrifice and commitment of our military, veterans, and their families. The relationship between the Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers and academic medicine dates back to the end of World War II and serves as a model for successful partnerships between public and private institutions. Our work with the White House on Joining Forces is a natural extension of our efforts in this area and renews our commitment to the wellness of our nation’s military.”
For more information about Joining Forces visit; www.joiningforces.gov
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2012 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Obama Administration discusses Islamic religion free speech behind closed doors
In an effort to clarify America’s free-speech policy regarding the Islamic religion, the Obama Administration held a multi-nation, closed-door meeting to discuss religious speech.
The conference attendees hope to appease Muslim nations by asking Americans to tone down their anti-Islamic religion rhetoric which the Administration claims may be the cause of unrest in the Middle East.
"We know that some people distort various religious doctrines to justify intolerance, foment violence or create strife that serves their narrow political purposes," said Suzan Johnson Cook, U.S. ambassador at large for international religious freedom. Johnson explained that offensive (religious) dialogue should be denounced, while "religion must never be used as an excuse to stifle freedom of expression."
The Islamic countries that attended the closed-to-media conference cite recent cartoons that mocked the prophet Muhammad and Florida preacher Terry Jones, who publically burns the Koran, as offensive and a reason for Americans to restrain their free speech rights’.
The Obama Administration hopes to broker a “middle ground” on this issue and invited nine European, nine Muslim as well as a few Latin American countries to participate in the three-day conference.
However, critics say the Administration is only pandering to the Middle East and point out that America already has a Constitution in place that sets clear free-speech parameters.
"Why is it that the U.S. Constitution must come second when representatives from Islamic counties such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan demand we must curb our religious liberties and free speech?" Andrea Lafferty, president of the Traditional Values Coalition asked. "Why is our government bending to Taliban values here on the home front?"
Officials contend the closed-door conference is an opportunity to resolve issues that are sensitive to Islamic nations.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
The conference attendees hope to appease Muslim nations by asking Americans to tone down their anti-Islamic religion rhetoric which the Administration claims may be the cause of unrest in the Middle East.
"We know that some people distort various religious doctrines to justify intolerance, foment violence or create strife that serves their narrow political purposes," said Suzan Johnson Cook, U.S. ambassador at large for international religious freedom. Johnson explained that offensive (religious) dialogue should be denounced, while "religion must never be used as an excuse to stifle freedom of expression."
The Islamic countries that attended the closed-to-media conference cite recent cartoons that mocked the prophet Muhammad and Florida preacher Terry Jones, who publically burns the Koran, as offensive and a reason for Americans to restrain their free speech rights’.
The Obama Administration hopes to broker a “middle ground” on this issue and invited nine European, nine Muslim as well as a few Latin American countries to participate in the three-day conference.
However, critics say the Administration is only pandering to the Middle East and point out that America already has a Constitution in place that sets clear free-speech parameters.
"Why is it that the U.S. Constitution must come second when representatives from Islamic counties such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan demand we must curb our religious liberties and free speech?" Andrea Lafferty, president of the Traditional Values Coalition asked. "Why is our government bending to Taliban values here on the home front?"
Officials contend the closed-door conference is an opportunity to resolve issues that are sensitive to Islamic nations.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Obama pardons several drug-related criminals
While Border Patrol agents put their lives on the line every day to stop drug smuggling along the nation’s southern border, President Obama announced yesterday he is pardoning several drug-related convicted felons.
The pardons draw attention to the recent conviction of Border Patrol Agent Jesus “Chito” Diaz. He was sentenced to two years in federal prison for allegedly lifting the handcuffs of a known-drug dealer in Texas.
The conviction drew the attention of numerous Congressmen who sent a letter to president Obama asking for the release of Agent Diaz. So far there has been no response from the White House or the Department of Justice who headed the prosecution of the Border Patrol agent.
The following is a list of the Presidential pardons;
PARDONS:
• Lesley Claywood Berry Jr. - Loretto, Ky.
Advertisement
Offense: Conspiracy to manufacture, possess with intent to distribute, and distribute marijuana, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
Sentence: April 29, 1988; District of Minnesota; three years in prison.
• Dennis George Bulin - Wesley Chapel, Fla.
Offense: Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 1,000 pounds of marijuana, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Sentence: March 10, 1987; Middle District of Alabama; five years of probation and $20,000 fine.
• Ricky Dale Collett - Annville, Ky.
Offense: Aiding and abetting in the manufacture of 61 marijuana plants, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Sentence: March 7, 2002; Eastern District of Kentucky; one year of probation conditioned on 60 days of home detention.
• Martin Kaprelian - Park Ridge, Ill.
Offense: Conspiracy to transport stolen property in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 371; transporting stolen property in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 2314; concealing stolen property that was transported in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 2315.
Sentence: Feb. 1, 1984; Northern District of Illinois; nine years in prison, five years of probation.
• Thomas Paul Ledford - Jonesborough, Tenn.
Offense: Conducting and directing an illegal gambling business, 18 U.S.C. § 1955.
Sentence: June 12, 1995; Eastern District of Tennessee; one year of probation conditioned on performance of 100 hours of community service.
COMMUTATION:
• Eugenia Marie Jennings - Alton, Ill.
Offense: Distribution of cocaine base, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
Sentence: Feb. 23, 2001; Southern District of Illinois; 262 months in prison, eight years of supervised release, $1,750 fine.
Terms of commutation: Prison sentence to expire on Dec. 21, 2011, leaving intact and in effect the eight-year term of supervised release with all its conditions and all other components of the sentence.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama pardons several drug-related criminals - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-pardons-several-drug-related-criminals#ixzz1eSHAz16H
The pardons draw attention to the recent conviction of Border Patrol Agent Jesus “Chito” Diaz. He was sentenced to two years in federal prison for allegedly lifting the handcuffs of a known-drug dealer in Texas.
The conviction drew the attention of numerous Congressmen who sent a letter to president Obama asking for the release of Agent Diaz. So far there has been no response from the White House or the Department of Justice who headed the prosecution of the Border Patrol agent.
The following is a list of the Presidential pardons;
PARDONS:
• Lesley Claywood Berry Jr. - Loretto, Ky.
Advertisement
Offense: Conspiracy to manufacture, possess with intent to distribute, and distribute marijuana, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
Sentence: April 29, 1988; District of Minnesota; three years in prison.
• Dennis George Bulin - Wesley Chapel, Fla.
Offense: Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 1,000 pounds of marijuana, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Sentence: March 10, 1987; Middle District of Alabama; five years of probation and $20,000 fine.
• Ricky Dale Collett - Annville, Ky.
Offense: Aiding and abetting in the manufacture of 61 marijuana plants, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Sentence: March 7, 2002; Eastern District of Kentucky; one year of probation conditioned on 60 days of home detention.
• Martin Kaprelian - Park Ridge, Ill.
Offense: Conspiracy to transport stolen property in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 371; transporting stolen property in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 2314; concealing stolen property that was transported in interstate commerce, 18 U.S.C. § 2315.
Sentence: Feb. 1, 1984; Northern District of Illinois; nine years in prison, five years of probation.
• Thomas Paul Ledford - Jonesborough, Tenn.
Offense: Conducting and directing an illegal gambling business, 18 U.S.C. § 1955.
Sentence: June 12, 1995; Eastern District of Tennessee; one year of probation conditioned on performance of 100 hours of community service.
COMMUTATION:
• Eugenia Marie Jennings - Alton, Ill.
Offense: Distribution of cocaine base, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
Sentence: Feb. 23, 2001; Southern District of Illinois; 262 months in prison, eight years of supervised release, $1,750 fine.
Terms of commutation: Prison sentence to expire on Dec. 21, 2011, leaving intact and in effect the eight-year term of supervised release with all its conditions and all other components of the sentence.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama pardons several drug-related criminals - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-pardons-several-drug-related-criminals#ixzz1eSHAz16H
Thursday, August 25, 2011
San Diego to get million dollar-solar energy project from the Obama Admin
Imperial County, just east of San Diego, has been approved to connect a 250-megawatt solar-power project to California’s energy grid something that will generate power for about 75,000 homes, according to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar.
The solar project is expected to create more than 250 jobs during construction and add approximately $5 million in sales tax to the job-starved state.
“Through smart site(ing) of projects, early environmental review and a coordinated approval process, Interior is helping to stand up a renewable energy economy, spurring innovation, job-creation, and investment in the private sector,” Secretary Salazar said about the CSOLAR Development project. “When constructed, this solar project will add to a growing, sustainable energy strategy that will power our local communities and economies.”
This new energy plant represents the Obama Administration’s commitment to solar, wind, geothermal and transmission projects.
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
“The solar project itself will be constructed on private, fallowed farm lands near El Centro,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey. “This transmission line will be placed in an area already designated as a transmission corridor. The entire project is sited in a perfect spot for renewable energy development in the California desert.”
The Interior Department’s continued commitment to responsible development of renewable energy was able to move this project forward after conducting an extensive environmental review with the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessments (EIR/EA).
The EIR/EA worked jointly with the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management, Department of Energy and County of Imperial, to meet the ecological requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com San Diego to get million dollar-solar energy project from the Obama Admin - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/san-diego-to-get-million-dollar-solar-energy-project-from-the-obama-admin#ixzz1W45apMMe
The solar project is expected to create more than 250 jobs during construction and add approximately $5 million in sales tax to the job-starved state.
“Through smart site(ing) of projects, early environmental review and a coordinated approval process, Interior is helping to stand up a renewable energy economy, spurring innovation, job-creation, and investment in the private sector,” Secretary Salazar said about the CSOLAR Development project. “When constructed, this solar project will add to a growing, sustainable energy strategy that will power our local communities and economies.”
This new energy plant represents the Obama Administration’s commitment to solar, wind, geothermal and transmission projects.
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
“The solar project itself will be constructed on private, fallowed farm lands near El Centro,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey. “This transmission line will be placed in an area already designated as a transmission corridor. The entire project is sited in a perfect spot for renewable energy development in the California desert.”
The Interior Department’s continued commitment to responsible development of renewable energy was able to move this project forward after conducting an extensive environmental review with the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessments (EIR/EA).
The EIR/EA worked jointly with the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management, Department of Energy and County of Imperial, to meet the ecological requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com San Diego to get million dollar-solar energy project from the Obama Admin - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/san-diego-to-get-million-dollar-solar-energy-project-from-the-obama-admin#ixzz1W45apMMe
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Bastardization of the 14th Amendment
The arrogance of Democrats’ calls for the president to invoke the 14th Amendment to by-pass Congress to raise the debt ceiling demonstrates their lack of Constitutional knowledge, but also their ignorance of the basic checks and balances between the three branches of government.
The third-ranking House Democrat, James Clyburn, said if Congress delivers a short-term debt deal, the president should veto it. The Southern Democrat pointed to the Constitution that says “the validity of the public debt of the United States… shall not be questioned.” Therefore, Clyburn says, the President “should sign an executive order invoking the 14th Amendment” to end the debt ceiling issue.
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) said the 14th Amendment should be the President’s last resort, “As far as the 14th Amendment is concerned, I urge everybody to get their Constitution and read it. It says the debts of the United States shall not be questioned.”
Even the mention of invoking the 14th Amendment sent some Republicans into a tizzy.
“Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes. It’s Congress that does the spending,” said Presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann (R-MN) during a CNN appearance. “The president is prohibited to do that (unilaterally raise America’s borrowing power). If he had the power to do that (borrow and spend), he would effectively be a dictator.” She is right.
Since all spending bills must originate in the House, (All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.” Art I, Sec 7). Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s claims that the President can pick and choose what debts the U.S. will pay are disingenuous. If a credit obligation is authorized by Congress, it must be paid.
The misunderstanding also extends to those GOP lawmakers who wished to invoke the 14th Amendment to un-anchor “illegal alien anchor babies” – this is a 14th Amendment history lesson.
GOP Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sought to revise the 14th Amendment, which currently grants citizenship to those born on America soil (this provision does not to extend to foreign diplomats).
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
Even Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH), said the change was “worth considering.”
However, John McCain(R-AZ), coauthor of McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, said he would support holding hearings on the (anchor baby) issue in light of the 14th Amendment.
So what is the 14th Amendment and why is it such a misunderstood and erroneously cited authority?
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to ensure that all former slaves were granted automatic United States citizenship, and enjoy all the rights, privileges and immunities of any other citizen.
A concise explanation of the 14th Amendment meaning comes from a paper written by Attorney Doug Hammerstrom. “In 1873 when the Supreme Court heard the Slaughterhouse Cases, its first 14th Amendment case, the Court rebuked the attempts of business interests to use the amendment, saying that the Fourteenth Amendment’s ‘main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the Negro.’ Justice Miller added, “We doubt very much whether any action of a State not directed by way of discrimination against the Negroes as a class, or on account of their race, will ever be held to come within the purview of this provision.”
The question American’s should be asking is what exactly does the emancipation of black slaves has to do with debt limits and illegal immigration in the United States in 2011?
President Obama, a self-proclaimed-Constitutional scholar, should know better and chastise Congress regarding the roles of the three branches of government. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment unambiguously states, “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
The Constitution remains the people’s document; it represents the beacon of freedom and protects the people’s liberty. And perhaps, more importantly, it has withstood the test of time.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Bastardization of the 14th Amendment - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/the-14th-amendment-debt-ceiling-immigration-debate-not-a-valid-argument#ixzz1U4lZ33n3
The third-ranking House Democrat, James Clyburn, said if Congress delivers a short-term debt deal, the president should veto it. The Southern Democrat pointed to the Constitution that says “the validity of the public debt of the United States… shall not be questioned.” Therefore, Clyburn says, the President “should sign an executive order invoking the 14th Amendment” to end the debt ceiling issue.
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) said the 14th Amendment should be the President’s last resort, “As far as the 14th Amendment is concerned, I urge everybody to get their Constitution and read it. It says the debts of the United States shall not be questioned.”
Even the mention of invoking the 14th Amendment sent some Republicans into a tizzy.
“Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes. It’s Congress that does the spending,” said Presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann (R-MN) during a CNN appearance. “The president is prohibited to do that (unilaterally raise America’s borrowing power). If he had the power to do that (borrow and spend), he would effectively be a dictator.” She is right.
Since all spending bills must originate in the House, (All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.” Art I, Sec 7). Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s claims that the President can pick and choose what debts the U.S. will pay are disingenuous. If a credit obligation is authorized by Congress, it must be paid.
The misunderstanding also extends to those GOP lawmakers who wished to invoke the 14th Amendment to un-anchor “illegal alien anchor babies” – this is a 14th Amendment history lesson.
GOP Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sought to revise the 14th Amendment, which currently grants citizenship to those born on America soil (this provision does not to extend to foreign diplomats).
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
Even Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH), said the change was “worth considering.”
However, John McCain(R-AZ), coauthor of McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, said he would support holding hearings on the (anchor baby) issue in light of the 14th Amendment.
So what is the 14th Amendment and why is it such a misunderstood and erroneously cited authority?
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to ensure that all former slaves were granted automatic United States citizenship, and enjoy all the rights, privileges and immunities of any other citizen.
A concise explanation of the 14th Amendment meaning comes from a paper written by Attorney Doug Hammerstrom. “In 1873 when the Supreme Court heard the Slaughterhouse Cases, its first 14th Amendment case, the Court rebuked the attempts of business interests to use the amendment, saying that the Fourteenth Amendment’s ‘main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the Negro.’ Justice Miller added, “We doubt very much whether any action of a State not directed by way of discrimination against the Negroes as a class, or on account of their race, will ever be held to come within the purview of this provision.”
The question American’s should be asking is what exactly does the emancipation of black slaves has to do with debt limits and illegal immigration in the United States in 2011?
President Obama, a self-proclaimed-Constitutional scholar, should know better and chastise Congress regarding the roles of the three branches of government. Section 5 of the 14th Amendment unambiguously states, “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
The Constitution remains the people’s document; it represents the beacon of freedom and protects the people’s liberty. And perhaps, more importantly, it has withstood the test of time.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Bastardization of the 14th Amendment - National Homeland Security | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/the-14th-amendment-debt-ceiling-immigration-debate-not-a-valid-argument#ixzz1U4lZ33n3
Monday, July 11, 2011
La Raza pushes Obama to save college Pell Grants for Latinos
In another all-hands-on deck campaign La Raza is calling on the Obama Administration to spare college Pell Grants for Latino students in the 2011/12 budget.
The country’s extended recession has hit all Americans hard, regardless of racial divide, yet La Raza continues to push racially-baited politics in an effort to put money in Latino’s hands.
Their latest Pell Grant campaign doesn’t mention the poor African-American, American-Indian or Caucasian children that can’t afford to attend college. Furthermore numerous experts have reported that black Americans continue to fall out of the middle class due to the influx of illegal immigrants who will work for less money.
The current fragile debt-ceiling negotiations are prompting members from both sides of the aisle to prepare a list of programs they are willing to defund. And college Pell Grants for Latinos are on the line.
“Latino students struggling to afford higher education are at risk of losing the opportunity to attend college. Right now, congressional Republicans and President Obama are negotiating a budget deal, and Pell Grants are on the table,” a La Raza email blast read. “Cuts to Pell Grants would follow the elimination of the Summer Pell program earlier this year. So far, needy students have “contributed” $4 billion to debt reduction through cuts to Summer Pell, but they may be asked to make more sacrifices, even if it means that they can’t pay for college.”
Advertisement
La Raza’s pitch continues, “President Obama understands that more Hispanic students must get college degrees for our country to remain economically competitive, but the cost of college has skyrocketed over the past 30 years.”
The price of a college education (tuition, fees and books) has increased dramatically since 1982. The Education Trust organization says the increase is somewhere around 439 percent.
“It’s true that Pell Grants are a lifeline for many college students who may not attend college,” according to La Raza. They contend that further cuts to Pell Grants would make college unaffordable and unattainable for needy students.
“What President Obama and congressional Republicans decide to do about Pell Grants will impact millions of Latinos hoping to graduate from college, enter the workforce, and climb the economic ladder,” La Raza said. “Without a college degree, Latino groups contend Hispanic youth will earn significantly less than more 'affluent students' with the means to pay for higher education.”
For more information on La Raza; http://action.nclr.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4417
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
The country’s extended recession has hit all Americans hard, regardless of racial divide, yet La Raza continues to push racially-baited politics in an effort to put money in Latino’s hands.
Their latest Pell Grant campaign doesn’t mention the poor African-American, American-Indian or Caucasian children that can’t afford to attend college. Furthermore numerous experts have reported that black Americans continue to fall out of the middle class due to the influx of illegal immigrants who will work for less money.
The current fragile debt-ceiling negotiations are prompting members from both sides of the aisle to prepare a list of programs they are willing to defund. And college Pell Grants for Latinos are on the line.
“Latino students struggling to afford higher education are at risk of losing the opportunity to attend college. Right now, congressional Republicans and President Obama are negotiating a budget deal, and Pell Grants are on the table,” a La Raza email blast read. “Cuts to Pell Grants would follow the elimination of the Summer Pell program earlier this year. So far, needy students have “contributed” $4 billion to debt reduction through cuts to Summer Pell, but they may be asked to make more sacrifices, even if it means that they can’t pay for college.”
Advertisement
La Raza’s pitch continues, “President Obama understands that more Hispanic students must get college degrees for our country to remain economically competitive, but the cost of college has skyrocketed over the past 30 years.”
The price of a college education (tuition, fees and books) has increased dramatically since 1982. The Education Trust organization says the increase is somewhere around 439 percent.
“It’s true that Pell Grants are a lifeline for many college students who may not attend college,” according to La Raza. They contend that further cuts to Pell Grants would make college unaffordable and unattainable for needy students.
“What President Obama and congressional Republicans decide to do about Pell Grants will impact millions of Latinos hoping to graduate from college, enter the workforce, and climb the economic ladder,” La Raza said. “Without a college degree, Latino groups contend Hispanic youth will earn significantly less than more 'affluent students' with the means to pay for higher education.”
For more information on La Raza; http://action.nclr.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4417
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/homeland-security-in-national/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Obama begins to wind-down the costly war in Afghanistan (Final in a series)
For antiwar groups, the President’s address to the nation was somewhat welcome news; the ever-increasing unpopularity of the war opened the door to common sense. On the other hand, critics called Obama’s speech a road map for insurgents to plan their takeover of the Afghan government.
The dilemma for commanders on the ground centers on the classification of the 10-year war. A mission change is in the works and military leaders will now shift the counterinsurgency strategy to a more stealthy counter-terrorism position.
Afghanistan’s corrupt government, lack of infrastructure and tribal tendencies have met a predictable ending- a U.S. troop departure, a small victory toppling the Taliban and killing Osama bin Laden.
General David Petraeus outlined the requirements for a successful counterinsurgency strategy in a 2006 military handbook. “As the counterinsurgent gains success, offensive and defensive operations become more in balance and eventually diminish in importance compared to stability operations.”
It has been five years since Petraeus wrote the Manual on Counterinsurgency and Afghanistan remains in the hands of corrupt leaders who provide economic and security failures for its people. Afghan President Hamid Karzai continues to swindle the American people by requesting billions of dollars for nation building; however, there has been little progress with building infrastructure in the past 10 years.
According to the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development in Afghanistan, the foreign aid dispensed to Afghanistan amounted to $320 million each month and the monthly military tab is approximately $10 billion. Other money earmarked for the corrupt Karzai government is a $19 billion slush fund that is included in the U.S. aid package, most of it coming under the Obama Administration for its counterinsurgency approach.
America’s love affair with exporting democracy has sent the nation into an economic abyss. In the case of Afghanistan, a 2003/04, a plan hatched by Army Lt. COL Anthony Shaffer could have saved taxpayers billions of dollars. His book entitled “Operation Dark Heart,” reported that Pakistan officials were meddling in the Afghan War and were not friends of the U.S. “They were playing both sides of the war efforts,” COL Shaffer said. Had COL Shaffer’s intelligence of the Afghan War effort been heeded by military leaders at the top, U.S. troops could have shifted their tactics and avoided a troop surge.
Evidence that the Department of Defense did not want COL Shaffer’s 2003/04 plan to find its way into civilian ranks came in the form of the heavily-redacted book “Operation Dark Heart.” The tell-all book chronicled gritty details regarding Pakistan’s and U.S. complicity with insurgents.
Many lawmakers as well as, Johnny Come Lately politicians, are arguing that the Afghan War’s focus should be on Pakistan’s unsavory alliance with the Taliban and al Qaeda. By focusing on terrorist organizations, the U.S. can unleash special op teams, and reduce the number of boots on the ground.
“There cannot be a gradual drawdown of troops without a change in mission objectives,” said Congressman Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA), a veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Successfully implementing a counterinsurgency strategy is near impossible without enough Marines and soldiers to see it through. On the other hand, counterterrorism operations linked to a more simplified set of objectives is sustainable with a significantly smaller force size.”
Hunter continues to explain that a drawdown is on the horizon, and the military must narrow its objectives in Afghanistan. “These objectives should consist of making sure the enemy cannot get back on its feet, strengthening the Afghan military and stabilizing Pakistan. We can do all of this with a much smaller footprint, utilizing special operations forces, intelligence gathering capability and air assets.”
Hunter contends the situation on the ground has changed and, “what might have seemed like a good strategy years or even months ago is not showing the level of success that justifies continuing the mission with such a large troop presence. The time has come for a change in strategy that begins with a departure from nation-building and counterinsurgency operations - the centerpiece of U.S. efforts in Afghanistan since Mr. Obama took office.”
Corruption fuels instability
Afghanistan’s corruption is legendary. The war-torn tribal nation provides fertile fields for training terrorists and growing poppies, is home to al Qaeda, and is where the 9/11 plotters hatched their terrorist attack on America. But sadly, in the worst kept secret in Central Asia, the U.S. condones and encourages the growing of poppies (the base ingredient for heroin and cocaine) paying billions to Taliban insurgents and warlords for convoy protection. We do so, not to keep the poor farmers happy, but to line the pockets of the Taliban, warlords, and the Karzai government. In other words, Americans are fighting and dying protecting the poppy fields.
Advertisement
“More declared cash flies out of Kabul each year than the Afghan government collects in tax and customs revenue nationwide. It’s not like they grow money on trees here,” said one U.S. official investigating the corruption and Taliban. “A lot of this looks like our tax dollars being stolen. And opium (poppies), of course.”
President Hamid Karzai sees the money changing hands differently. “Making money is fine and taking money out of the country is fine. The relatives of government officials can do this, starting with my brothers. But there’s a possibility of corruption.”
If this is true why does America/NATO continue to send billions of dollars to such a corrupt country? This scenario implies the American government chose its political elites poorly and the continuation of business as usual will only leave disenfranchised Afghan civilians inflamed at the U.S.
According to separate Congressional and Senate reports, the American government pays more than $2 billion for Host Nation Trucking (HNT) or in layman’s terms, private security firms that protect U.S. military convoys and materials in dangerous tribal areas.
A report titled “Warlord, Inc., Extortion and Corruption along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan” was published by Congressman John Tierney (D-MA) in June of last year. The report detailed the billions of dollars spent to protect U.S. military supply convoys in Afghanistan- the majority of the money is paid by the DOD through defense contractors and finds its way into the hands of Taliban leaders and warlords.
The Senate Armed Services Committee also sent staffers to investigate the “convoy protection” issue. Their report titled, “Inquiry into the Role and Oversight of Private Security Contractors in Afghanistan” concluded the U.S. pays trucking contractors billions of dollars a year, much of it ends up in the hands of local warlords.
Two U.S. administrations have now promised a “hearts and minds” and "nation building" campaigns and to date both have subverted the ability to impose a military solution. This role is fraught with disappointments since it implies that the U.S. and allied forces will provide the Afghan people with an effective government, root out corruption, create a westernized Afghan military, value women’s rights and ensure fair elections.
It has been 10 years since America waded into the Middle East Wars, and the ability to achieve victory continues to be nothing more than a pipe dream.
Part one- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
Part two- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/us-payments-to-taliban-afghan-warlords-threaten-american-nato-troops
Part three- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/billion-dollar-corruption-within-the-u-s-picked-afghan-regime
Part four- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/terrorism-s-down-payment-the-form-drugs-and-u-s-aid-money-part-4
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama begins to wind-down the costly war in Afghanistan (Final in a series) - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-begins-to-wind-down-the-costly-war-afghanistan-final-a-series#ixzz1Q9m8JYNF
The dilemma for commanders on the ground centers on the classification of the 10-year war. A mission change is in the works and military leaders will now shift the counterinsurgency strategy to a more stealthy counter-terrorism position.
Afghanistan’s corrupt government, lack of infrastructure and tribal tendencies have met a predictable ending- a U.S. troop departure, a small victory toppling the Taliban and killing Osama bin Laden.
General David Petraeus outlined the requirements for a successful counterinsurgency strategy in a 2006 military handbook. “As the counterinsurgent gains success, offensive and defensive operations become more in balance and eventually diminish in importance compared to stability operations.”
It has been five years since Petraeus wrote the Manual on Counterinsurgency and Afghanistan remains in the hands of corrupt leaders who provide economic and security failures for its people. Afghan President Hamid Karzai continues to swindle the American people by requesting billions of dollars for nation building; however, there has been little progress with building infrastructure in the past 10 years.
According to the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development in Afghanistan, the foreign aid dispensed to Afghanistan amounted to $320 million each month and the monthly military tab is approximately $10 billion. Other money earmarked for the corrupt Karzai government is a $19 billion slush fund that is included in the U.S. aid package, most of it coming under the Obama Administration for its counterinsurgency approach.
America’s love affair with exporting democracy has sent the nation into an economic abyss. In the case of Afghanistan, a 2003/04, a plan hatched by Army Lt. COL Anthony Shaffer could have saved taxpayers billions of dollars. His book entitled “Operation Dark Heart,” reported that Pakistan officials were meddling in the Afghan War and were not friends of the U.S. “They were playing both sides of the war efforts,” COL Shaffer said. Had COL Shaffer’s intelligence of the Afghan War effort been heeded by military leaders at the top, U.S. troops could have shifted their tactics and avoided a troop surge.
Evidence that the Department of Defense did not want COL Shaffer’s 2003/04 plan to find its way into civilian ranks came in the form of the heavily-redacted book “Operation Dark Heart.” The tell-all book chronicled gritty details regarding Pakistan’s and U.S. complicity with insurgents.
Many lawmakers as well as, Johnny Come Lately politicians, are arguing that the Afghan War’s focus should be on Pakistan’s unsavory alliance with the Taliban and al Qaeda. By focusing on terrorist organizations, the U.S. can unleash special op teams, and reduce the number of boots on the ground.
“There cannot be a gradual drawdown of troops without a change in mission objectives,” said Congressman Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA), a veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Successfully implementing a counterinsurgency strategy is near impossible without enough Marines and soldiers to see it through. On the other hand, counterterrorism operations linked to a more simplified set of objectives is sustainable with a significantly smaller force size.”
Hunter continues to explain that a drawdown is on the horizon, and the military must narrow its objectives in Afghanistan. “These objectives should consist of making sure the enemy cannot get back on its feet, strengthening the Afghan military and stabilizing Pakistan. We can do all of this with a much smaller footprint, utilizing special operations forces, intelligence gathering capability and air assets.”
Hunter contends the situation on the ground has changed and, “what might have seemed like a good strategy years or even months ago is not showing the level of success that justifies continuing the mission with such a large troop presence. The time has come for a change in strategy that begins with a departure from nation-building and counterinsurgency operations - the centerpiece of U.S. efforts in Afghanistan since Mr. Obama took office.”
Corruption fuels instability
Afghanistan’s corruption is legendary. The war-torn tribal nation provides fertile fields for training terrorists and growing poppies, is home to al Qaeda, and is where the 9/11 plotters hatched their terrorist attack on America. But sadly, in the worst kept secret in Central Asia, the U.S. condones and encourages the growing of poppies (the base ingredient for heroin and cocaine) paying billions to Taliban insurgents and warlords for convoy protection. We do so, not to keep the poor farmers happy, but to line the pockets of the Taliban, warlords, and the Karzai government. In other words, Americans are fighting and dying protecting the poppy fields.
Advertisement
“More declared cash flies out of Kabul each year than the Afghan government collects in tax and customs revenue nationwide. It’s not like they grow money on trees here,” said one U.S. official investigating the corruption and Taliban. “A lot of this looks like our tax dollars being stolen. And opium (poppies), of course.”
President Hamid Karzai sees the money changing hands differently. “Making money is fine and taking money out of the country is fine. The relatives of government officials can do this, starting with my brothers. But there’s a possibility of corruption.”
If this is true why does America/NATO continue to send billions of dollars to such a corrupt country? This scenario implies the American government chose its political elites poorly and the continuation of business as usual will only leave disenfranchised Afghan civilians inflamed at the U.S.
According to separate Congressional and Senate reports, the American government pays more than $2 billion for Host Nation Trucking (HNT) or in layman’s terms, private security firms that protect U.S. military convoys and materials in dangerous tribal areas.
A report titled “Warlord, Inc., Extortion and Corruption along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan” was published by Congressman John Tierney (D-MA) in June of last year. The report detailed the billions of dollars spent to protect U.S. military supply convoys in Afghanistan- the majority of the money is paid by the DOD through defense contractors and finds its way into the hands of Taliban leaders and warlords.
The Senate Armed Services Committee also sent staffers to investigate the “convoy protection” issue. Their report titled, “Inquiry into the Role and Oversight of Private Security Contractors in Afghanistan” concluded the U.S. pays trucking contractors billions of dollars a year, much of it ends up in the hands of local warlords.
Two U.S. administrations have now promised a “hearts and minds” and "nation building" campaigns and to date both have subverted the ability to impose a military solution. This role is fraught with disappointments since it implies that the U.S. and allied forces will provide the Afghan people with an effective government, root out corruption, create a westernized Afghan military, value women’s rights and ensure fair elections.
It has been 10 years since America waded into the Middle East Wars, and the ability to achieve victory continues to be nothing more than a pipe dream.
Part one- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/u-s-troops-fight-and-die-to-preserve-shariah-law-afghanistan
Part two- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/us-payments-to-taliban-afghan-warlords-threaten-american-nato-troops
Part three- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/billion-dollar-corruption-within-the-u-s-picked-afghan-regime
Part four- http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/terrorism-s-down-payment-the-form-drugs-and-u-s-aid-money-part-4
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama begins to wind-down the costly war in Afghanistan (Final in a series) - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-begins-to-wind-down-the-costly-war-afghanistan-final-a-series#ixzz1Q9m8JYNF
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Report shows African Americans suffer higher than average unemployment
Looking at the want ads in the Sunday paper is a lot tougher on the nation’s African-American community, according to the latest Bureau of Labor statistics figures which confirm higher than average unemployment for President Obama’s most loyal voting base.
The unemployment rate for black Americans remains just more than 16 percent; while their white counterparts hover around the 8 percent mark. The numbers don’t get any easier for African Americans when they compare to Latinos whose unemployment rate is 11.8 percent or Asians who enjoy the lowest joblessness of 6.4 percent.
The stubborn recession has left many job seekers crushed while searching for a good, fulltime job and as long as the nation’s joblessness holds firm, the president will have a tough time campaigning for his reelection.
Another problem job seekers face is under-employment.
A new Gallup year-long survey chart showed how unemployment and underemployment have remained within a narrow band. Unemployment, according to Gallup, has remained about 10 percent and underemployment persists near 20 percent.
Making matters worse is a recent story in The New York Times, “Only One in Four Young Black Men in New York City Have a Job.”
“The new report was prepared by the Community Service Society of New York, has other unhappy news about this group — that the unemployment rate for African-American men in New York, age 16 to 24, was 33.5 percent from January 2009 through June 2010,” the article read.
“The recession has created a landscape of the unemployed and underemployed with particular catastrophic consequences for young African-American men,” said David R. Jones, president of the, an advocacy group for New York’s low-income residents.
The new numbers have been a telling trend for African Americans in recent years that have seen lack of employment slowly creep into the double-digits.
“There is no question that black America is worse off than it has been in at least the last 30 years,” said Glen Ford, an executive editor for the Black Agenda Report.
Ted Hayes, a black activist and ardent critic of the Obama Administration, talks a lot about the black guilt this country continues to feel. “We have been bamboozled by the Democratic leaders like President Obama, Charlie Rangel, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, who continue to give us more Jim Crow politics,” he said.
Advertisement
Hayes, who also has his own radio program and website said, “blacks need to stop following the welfare agenda of the African American community leaders.”
The job idleness rate for blacks remains constant and some experts point to the decline in the housing market as a large factor in unemployment for blacks. In the past, construction jobs have been a mainstay for many young African-Americans.
Civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson said blacks are “number one in high unemployment, number one in home foreclosures and number one in populating the prisons of our country.”
However, some experts contend that the large illegal alien population in America accounts for the loss of jobs for blacks. They argue the fact that the illegals, who are primarily Hispanic, will work for less money and have virtually taken over the construction workplace.
Despite this trend, the New York Civil Liberties Union joined immigrants’ and civil rights supporters in the city to protest Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s position on the New York’s Secure Communities, a federal program that runs fingerprints of those arrested against the federal immigration data base, if a match is obtained those illegal immigrants are subject to deportation.
“Governor Cuomo should demonstrate his commitment to New York’s immigrant families and withdraw the state from this destructive program,” said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU. “Secure Communities contradicts our state’s proud tradition of embracing immigrants and it ignores immigrants’ immeasurable contributions to New York’s economy, culture and heritage.”
There has been an effort in many liberal cities to fight the federal law banning sanctuary cities, some like San Francisco law enforcement have gone on the record saying they will not obey the law and will not release fingerprint information, even if the illegal aliens are wanted for a variety of crimes.
In the meantime, it looks like black American’s are left holding the highest unemployment prize.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Report shows African Americans suffer higher than average unemployment - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/report-shows-african-americans-suffer-higher-than-average-unemployment#ixzz1NIBszoTg
The unemployment rate for black Americans remains just more than 16 percent; while their white counterparts hover around the 8 percent mark. The numbers don’t get any easier for African Americans when they compare to Latinos whose unemployment rate is 11.8 percent or Asians who enjoy the lowest joblessness of 6.4 percent.
The stubborn recession has left many job seekers crushed while searching for a good, fulltime job and as long as the nation’s joblessness holds firm, the president will have a tough time campaigning for his reelection.
Another problem job seekers face is under-employment.
A new Gallup year-long survey chart showed how unemployment and underemployment have remained within a narrow band. Unemployment, according to Gallup, has remained about 10 percent and underemployment persists near 20 percent.
Making matters worse is a recent story in The New York Times, “Only One in Four Young Black Men in New York City Have a Job.”
“The new report was prepared by the Community Service Society of New York, has other unhappy news about this group — that the unemployment rate for African-American men in New York, age 16 to 24, was 33.5 percent from January 2009 through June 2010,” the article read.
“The recession has created a landscape of the unemployed and underemployed with particular catastrophic consequences for young African-American men,” said David R. Jones, president of the, an advocacy group for New York’s low-income residents.
The new numbers have been a telling trend for African Americans in recent years that have seen lack of employment slowly creep into the double-digits.
“There is no question that black America is worse off than it has been in at least the last 30 years,” said Glen Ford, an executive editor for the Black Agenda Report.
Ted Hayes, a black activist and ardent critic of the Obama Administration, talks a lot about the black guilt this country continues to feel. “We have been bamboozled by the Democratic leaders like President Obama, Charlie Rangel, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, who continue to give us more Jim Crow politics,” he said.
Advertisement
Hayes, who also has his own radio program and website said, “blacks need to stop following the welfare agenda of the African American community leaders.”
The job idleness rate for blacks remains constant and some experts point to the decline in the housing market as a large factor in unemployment for blacks. In the past, construction jobs have been a mainstay for many young African-Americans.
Civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson said blacks are “number one in high unemployment, number one in home foreclosures and number one in populating the prisons of our country.”
However, some experts contend that the large illegal alien population in America accounts for the loss of jobs for blacks. They argue the fact that the illegals, who are primarily Hispanic, will work for less money and have virtually taken over the construction workplace.
Despite this trend, the New York Civil Liberties Union joined immigrants’ and civil rights supporters in the city to protest Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s position on the New York’s Secure Communities, a federal program that runs fingerprints of those arrested against the federal immigration data base, if a match is obtained those illegal immigrants are subject to deportation.
“Governor Cuomo should demonstrate his commitment to New York’s immigrant families and withdraw the state from this destructive program,” said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU. “Secure Communities contradicts our state’s proud tradition of embracing immigrants and it ignores immigrants’ immeasurable contributions to New York’s economy, culture and heritage.”
There has been an effort in many liberal cities to fight the federal law banning sanctuary cities, some like San Francisco law enforcement have gone on the record saying they will not obey the law and will not release fingerprint information, even if the illegal aliens are wanted for a variety of crimes.
In the meantime, it looks like black American’s are left holding the highest unemployment prize.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com Report shows African Americans suffer higher than average unemployment - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/report-shows-african-americans-suffer-higher-than-average-unemployment#ixzz1NIBszoTg
Friday, April 8, 2011
Virginia Congressman tells concerned veteran to sit down and be quiet
The budget crisis has indeed come down to the eleventh hour and a government shut-down seems imminent, however it’s not the closure of the federal offices that should concern Americans it’s the disregard for the U.S. military.
With three wars raging in the Middle East and humanitarian assistance the over-stretched forces are providing Japan, one would think lawmakers would insist military personnel and their families are taken care of during this very stressful time in their lives.
In fact the Republicans put forth a new budget bill that would fund the military the rest of the year and removing them from the political gamesmanship.
However, the Senate and President Obama said no deal.
This is the point one retired veteran made at a town hall meeting last night in Virginia. Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) was clearly upset that a 27-year veteran wanted his representative to be working harder to avert a government shutdown, one that would unfairly affect the armed forces.
Advertisement
Once the back and forth unfolded the Congressman told the disable veteran his arguments were “caustic.” The entire conversation was caught on video and can be seen here.
The disrespect lawmakers continue hurl onto military personnel is shameful, one that voters of Virginia should remember in 2012.
To view video comments begin to heat up at the four minute mark, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfhY3ZEbv5I&feature=player_embedded
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
With three wars raging in the Middle East and humanitarian assistance the over-stretched forces are providing Japan, one would think lawmakers would insist military personnel and their families are taken care of during this very stressful time in their lives.
In fact the Republicans put forth a new budget bill that would fund the military the rest of the year and removing them from the political gamesmanship.
However, the Senate and President Obama said no deal.
This is the point one retired veteran made at a town hall meeting last night in Virginia. Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) was clearly upset that a 27-year veteran wanted his representative to be working harder to avert a government shutdown, one that would unfairly affect the armed forces.
Advertisement
Once the back and forth unfolded the Congressman told the disable veteran his arguments were “caustic.” The entire conversation was caught on video and can be seen here.
The disrespect lawmakers continue hurl onto military personnel is shameful, one that voters of Virginia should remember in 2012.
To view video comments begin to heat up at the four minute mark, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfhY3ZEbv5I&feature=player_embedded
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Breaking: Eiffel Tower evacuated after terrorist threat
While the French are proclaiming they are not at war with Libya, authorities evacuated the City of Light’s famous Eiffel Tower after a suspicious package was found.
Approximately 4,000 tourists were whisked away when the landmark’s personnel received a phone call that the Eiffel Tower would be blown up by the package left at the tourist attraction.
While details remain unclear as to the threat to the French landmark it appears the newest Middle Eastern War in Libya will have consequences outside the region.
French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said their involvement could have “domestic repercussions,'' and their intelligence services have been assembled and “threats were made” against France. But the leader has not provided any details of the threats.
It is worth pointing out that the multi-lateral forces still do not know the actual military capabilities of the Libyan insurgents or Libyan Dictator Muammar Qaddafi.
As the escalating war in Libya approaches the one-week mark, questions begin to mount as to who will actually take the lead in the coming days. President Obama continues to promise a handover of power is on the horizon.
For More stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Approximately 4,000 tourists were whisked away when the landmark’s personnel received a phone call that the Eiffel Tower would be blown up by the package left at the tourist attraction.
While details remain unclear as to the threat to the French landmark it appears the newest Middle Eastern War in Libya will have consequences outside the region.
French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said their involvement could have “domestic repercussions,'' and their intelligence services have been assembled and “threats were made” against France. But the leader has not provided any details of the threats.
It is worth pointing out that the multi-lateral forces still do not know the actual military capabilities of the Libyan insurgents or Libyan Dictator Muammar Qaddafi.
As the escalating war in Libya approaches the one-week mark, questions begin to mount as to who will actually take the lead in the coming days. President Obama continues to promise a handover of power is on the horizon.
For More stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Obama seeks Internet kill switch for U.S.
While the Middle East crisis continues to simmer or boil over in Egypt’s case, American lawmakers revisit the need to implement an Internet kill switch for the U.S.
The need for such aggressive measures by any government has played out in recent days and U.S. lawmakers have dusted off their playbooks and will take a hard look at the need to “protect” its constituents from a so-called cyber attack.
Leading the charge are Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) who point to WikiLeaks as a reason to control the Internet cyber space. The bill titled, “Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act,” would give the president the authority to track critical cyber-infrastructure lists. This legislation would give the president the ability to turn off the Internet without any judicial review. Something the world is now witnessing in Egypt.
However, Senator Collins claims the “switch” would be different in the United States. “It would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,” she explained. “It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant treat.”
Does she mean a threat like a country-wide uprising against an out-of-control government?
The unprecedented crackdown of Egypt’s dictator, Hosni Mubarak, to shut off the Internet, outside TV and cell phone services prompted immediate criticism from the Obama Administration. It’s ironic they are asking for the same “kill switch” technology for Americans.
Experts agree that if the U.S. government shut-down the Internet the ramifications would be far-reaching. A majority of the population currently uses the World Wide Web to get its news coverage as well as monitor their financial accounts or pay their bills.
American’s need to learn from Egypt’s hard-line with Internet services says Dan Costa of PC Magazine.
“The surprising thing isn’t that a corrupt, authoritarian regime would launch this kind of state-sponsored denial off service attack on its own citizens,” Costa said. “Nor that it is willing to jeopardize its economy by cutting its business off from the world markets. No, the thing that surprises me is that the U.S. government has plans for its own Internet ‘kill switch.’”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com: Obama seeks Internet kill switch for U.S. - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-seeks-internet-kill-switch-for-u-s#ixzz1CdX4owdF
The need for such aggressive measures by any government has played out in recent days and U.S. lawmakers have dusted off their playbooks and will take a hard look at the need to “protect” its constituents from a so-called cyber attack.
Leading the charge are Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) who point to WikiLeaks as a reason to control the Internet cyber space. The bill titled, “Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act,” would give the president the authority to track critical cyber-infrastructure lists. This legislation would give the president the ability to turn off the Internet without any judicial review. Something the world is now witnessing in Egypt.
However, Senator Collins claims the “switch” would be different in the United States. “It would provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency,” she explained. “It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant treat.”
Does she mean a threat like a country-wide uprising against an out-of-control government?
The unprecedented crackdown of Egypt’s dictator, Hosni Mubarak, to shut off the Internet, outside TV and cell phone services prompted immediate criticism from the Obama Administration. It’s ironic they are asking for the same “kill switch” technology for Americans.
Experts agree that if the U.S. government shut-down the Internet the ramifications would be far-reaching. A majority of the population currently uses the World Wide Web to get its news coverage as well as monitor their financial accounts or pay their bills.
American’s need to learn from Egypt’s hard-line with Internet services says Dan Costa of PC Magazine.
“The surprising thing isn’t that a corrupt, authoritarian regime would launch this kind of state-sponsored denial off service attack on its own citizens,” Costa said. “Nor that it is willing to jeopardize its economy by cutting its business off from the world markets. No, the thing that surprises me is that the U.S. government has plans for its own Internet ‘kill switch.’”
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2011 Kimberly Dvorak All Rights Reserved.
Continue reading on Examiner.com: Obama seeks Internet kill switch for U.S. - San Diego County Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/obama-seeks-internet-kill-switch-for-u-s#ixzz1CdX4owdF
Sunday, November 28, 2010
WikiLeaks dumps 250,000 new cables- it’s a who’s who list in American politics
It’s like reading a who’s who in American politics, as WikiLeaks published more than 250,000 State Department documents mostly dealing with the two wars in the Middle East.
Names like President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and General Petraeus are on the country’s heavy hitter list and latest targets of intelligence documents released by the new “go to” sensational website WikiLeaks. http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/
Major news organizations like the New York Times and Britain’s Guardian have already posted stories highlighting many classified State Department cables- some the Obama Administration claim will endanger current and past government officials and diplomats.
As a result the White House released a statement following the latest WikiLeaks document dump. “President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal.” It continued to articulate that, “By releasing stolen and classified documents, WikiLeaks has put at risk not only the cause of human rights but also the lives and work of these individuals.”
Some of the notable communiqué’s include;
* Corruption with the Afghanistan government, including reports of a senior official found carrying more than $50 million in cash on an overseas trip; also a cable reveals that President Karzai’s brother involvement with illicit drugs and said he “demonstrated that he will dissemble when it suits his needs. He appears not to understand the level of our knowledge of his activities. We will need to monitor his activity closely and deliver a recurring, transparent message to him about the limits of American tolerance.”
* It appears there was substantial bargaining to vacate Guantanamo Bay prison. The cable even shows the Obama Administration telling Slovenian diplomats to take a freed prisoner if they expected a meeting with President Obama.
* The Bush Administration was caught warning Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency employees.
* Cables displayed Iran’s efforts to adapt North Korean long-range missiles.
* Another cable reveals Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telling U.S. officials to spy on the UN's leadership.
* Perhaps most unnerving is the extremely close relationship between Russian Prime Minister Putin and his Italian counterpart Berlusconi and the fact the Italian leader was promoting Putin’s policies.
* The leaks also alleged a number of links between the Russian government and organized crime.
* Surprisingly WikiLeaks reveals Yemen's president talking to then U.S. Middle East Commander General Petraeus about attacks on al-Qaeda bases in Yemen and quoting; "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours."
* The leaks also reveal the failure of the U.S. to stop Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
* Allowing the “business as usual” methods in the fight against terrorism took center stage by allowing Saudi donors to remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like al Qaeda and Qatar. Both countries have been good hosts to the American military, but WikiLeaks cables allude to the fact they were the “worst in the region” in counterterrorism efforts.
* WikiLeaks contends that Qatar’s security service was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals.”
* The U.S. ambassador to Eritrea said last year “Eritrean officials are ignorant or lying” in denying that they were supporting the al-Shabaab, a militant-wing Islamist group in Somalia. There have been several recent arrests in San Diego of al-Shabaab sympathizers sending money to the North African terrorist organization.
Most of the documents released from WikiLeaks were unclassified and they claim none of the memos were marked “top secret,” which is the U.S. government’s secure category. However WikiLeaks admits some of the leaked documents were classified as “secret.”
Another 9,000 cables were labeled “noforn,” which is shorthand for material that is too delicate to mutually share with foreign governments.
As information begins to circulate and the war-time leaks make the international rounds, the State Department, Pentagon and White House will most likely have a lot of explaining to do- not something a battered Obama Administration looks forward to defending.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2010Kimberly Dvorak all rights reserved
Names like President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and General Petraeus are on the country’s heavy hitter list and latest targets of intelligence documents released by the new “go to” sensational website WikiLeaks. http://cablegate.wikileaks.org/
Major news organizations like the New York Times and Britain’s Guardian have already posted stories highlighting many classified State Department cables- some the Obama Administration claim will endanger current and past government officials and diplomats.
As a result the White House released a statement following the latest WikiLeaks document dump. “President Obama supports responsible, accountable, and open government at home and around the world, but this reckless and dangerous action runs counter to that goal.” It continued to articulate that, “By releasing stolen and classified documents, WikiLeaks has put at risk not only the cause of human rights but also the lives and work of these individuals.”
Some of the notable communiqué’s include;
* Corruption with the Afghanistan government, including reports of a senior official found carrying more than $50 million in cash on an overseas trip; also a cable reveals that President Karzai’s brother involvement with illicit drugs and said he “demonstrated that he will dissemble when it suits his needs. He appears not to understand the level of our knowledge of his activities. We will need to monitor his activity closely and deliver a recurring, transparent message to him about the limits of American tolerance.”
* It appears there was substantial bargaining to vacate Guantanamo Bay prison. The cable even shows the Obama Administration telling Slovenian diplomats to take a freed prisoner if they expected a meeting with President Obama.
* The Bush Administration was caught warning Germany in 2007 not to enforce arrest warrants for Central Intelligence Agency employees.
* Cables displayed Iran’s efforts to adapt North Korean long-range missiles.
* Another cable reveals Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telling U.S. officials to spy on the UN's leadership.
* Perhaps most unnerving is the extremely close relationship between Russian Prime Minister Putin and his Italian counterpart Berlusconi and the fact the Italian leader was promoting Putin’s policies.
* The leaks also alleged a number of links between the Russian government and organized crime.
* Surprisingly WikiLeaks reveals Yemen's president talking to then U.S. Middle East Commander General Petraeus about attacks on al-Qaeda bases in Yemen and quoting; "We'll continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours."
* The leaks also reveal the failure of the U.S. to stop Syria from supplying arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
* Allowing the “business as usual” methods in the fight against terrorism took center stage by allowing Saudi donors to remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like al Qaeda and Qatar. Both countries have been good hosts to the American military, but WikiLeaks cables allude to the fact they were the “worst in the region” in counterterrorism efforts.
* WikiLeaks contends that Qatar’s security service was “hesitant to act against known terrorists out of concern for appearing to be aligned with the U.S. and provoking reprisals.”
* The U.S. ambassador to Eritrea said last year “Eritrean officials are ignorant or lying” in denying that they were supporting the al-Shabaab, a militant-wing Islamist group in Somalia. There have been several recent arrests in San Diego of al-Shabaab sympathizers sending money to the North African terrorist organization.
Most of the documents released from WikiLeaks were unclassified and they claim none of the memos were marked “top secret,” which is the U.S. government’s secure category. However WikiLeaks admits some of the leaked documents were classified as “secret.”
Another 9,000 cables were labeled “noforn,” which is shorthand for material that is too delicate to mutually share with foreign governments.
As information begins to circulate and the war-time leaks make the international rounds, the State Department, Pentagon and White House will most likely have a lot of explaining to do- not something a battered Obama Administration looks forward to defending.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/kimberly-dvorak
© Copyright 2010Kimberly Dvorak all rights reserved
Monday, September 20, 2010
Secret White House meeting pushes for support of DREAM Act
A Friday afternoon telephone conference was held by Cecelia Munoz and Stephanie Valencia, members of Obama’s staff, urging participants to reach out to community organizers and encouraging them to call their lawmakers acknowledging their support for the DREAM Act (AKA amnesty).
The 20-minute call was an off-the-record conversation that was billed as a “no media or blogger” conference call.
The topic of discussion was the DREAM Act. The Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors that would provide a road to citizenship for young illegal aliens if their parents brought them into the country before age 16 and they attend college for at least two years, join the U.S. military or be under the age of 35.
During this six-year conditional period, immigrants would not be eligible for federal higher education grants, but they would be able to apply for scholarships, student loans and work study grants.
Since Obama is a cosponsor of the original DREAM Act it’s natural for the president to be pleased with Senate leader Harry Reid’s intensions to place the amnesty amendment in a defense spending bill.
It was clear at the beginning of the conference call that this session was not meant to lobby for anything in particular by the senior-level staffers, but it was apparent they felt strongly that including the DREAM Act in a defense bill was the right thing to do.
Munoz and Valencia informed listeners that the White House and cabinet leaders would be on the phones all weekend securing the necessary 60 votes to get the amendment out of committee and into the legislation for debate.
The fact that the White House was proactively mobilizing its community organization network made it clear the Democrats do not have the votes they need to get the amendment out of committee. Political insiders agree and say this is nothing more than a political ploy to show Latino voters that the GOP is not on their side and they better vote for Democrats come November.
However, the fact that Democrats have large majorities in both houses and have failed to get any form of immigration reform legislation introduced, let alone passed, signals the party is divided on this issue.
Over the weekend the White House was working the phone lines and preparing for a GOP filibuster, the White House staffers said.
In the end, Munoz and Valencia agreed that the administration had given “very clear marching orders” to get this amendment added to the Department of Defense war appropriations bill, mobilize community organizers much like they did to get President Obama elected and get the DREAM Act signed into law.
Is the conference call legal?
While the White House conference call directive made it clear they were not lobbying for the DREAM Act, the intent was clear- community organizers start mobilizing.
There is a law that prevents White House employees from lobbying particular topics and immigration is clearly a hot-button issue.
Knowing that those in Washington hold a reasonable amount power, legislators drew up the Hatch Act. It was passed into law in 1939 and regulates political activities of federal employees and some state and local government workers.
The legislation originally prohibited nearly all partisan activity by federal employees, banning them from endorsing candidates, distributing campaign literature, organizing political activities and holding posts in partisan organizations.
However, today, most career government employees can run for nonpartisan offices, make financial contributions to political organizations, get involved in political groups, and campaign for candidates by making speeches, distributing literature and signing nominating positions.
The remaining restrictions on federal employees' activities in the political arena are tailored much more narrowly to their jobs; they still are banned from using their authority to exert influence over an election; encourage or discourage political activity by anyone with business before their agency; do political work while on duty, in uniform, in the office or in a government vehicle or run for partisan office.
Political appointees operate under the same rules with some exceptions. They are allowed to engage in and may express opinions about candidates, issues, may attend and be active at political rallies.
Currently White House staffer Valencia, who led the conference call, handles outreach to the Latino community, immigration, and housing groups inside the White House. She also served on the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team and was Deputy Latino Vote Director during Obama’s presidential campaign. The nature of her job lends itself to indirect lobbying, but she is walking a very fine line by expressing action needs to be taken according to the Hatch Act. The same is true for Munoz.
Munoz reached the White House staff via President Obama, she is a known left-leaning Latino activist who was appointed to head the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs. She is a former vice president for National Council of La Raza and is charged with outreach to state and local governments as well as constituency groups.
In addition to her La Raza post, Munoz was also the board chair of Center for Community Change, served on the U.S. Programs Board of the Open Society Institute and the Board of Directors of the Atlantic Philanthropies.
National Council of La Raza is a liberal Hispanic organization that advocates for Latinos who reside in America illegally and pushes for open border legislation as a way to gain a foothold in the U.S. political landscape. The group has been supported by both the Republicans and Democrats who are looking to gain control of America’s fastest growing voter block.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/amnesty-debate-heats-up-with-the-dream-act
The 20-minute call was an off-the-record conversation that was billed as a “no media or blogger” conference call.
The topic of discussion was the DREAM Act. The Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors that would provide a road to citizenship for young illegal aliens if their parents brought them into the country before age 16 and they attend college for at least two years, join the U.S. military or be under the age of 35.
During this six-year conditional period, immigrants would not be eligible for federal higher education grants, but they would be able to apply for scholarships, student loans and work study grants.
Since Obama is a cosponsor of the original DREAM Act it’s natural for the president to be pleased with Senate leader Harry Reid’s intensions to place the amnesty amendment in a defense spending bill.
It was clear at the beginning of the conference call that this session was not meant to lobby for anything in particular by the senior-level staffers, but it was apparent they felt strongly that including the DREAM Act in a defense bill was the right thing to do.
Munoz and Valencia informed listeners that the White House and cabinet leaders would be on the phones all weekend securing the necessary 60 votes to get the amendment out of committee and into the legislation for debate.
The fact that the White House was proactively mobilizing its community organization network made it clear the Democrats do not have the votes they need to get the amendment out of committee. Political insiders agree and say this is nothing more than a political ploy to show Latino voters that the GOP is not on their side and they better vote for Democrats come November.
However, the fact that Democrats have large majorities in both houses and have failed to get any form of immigration reform legislation introduced, let alone passed, signals the party is divided on this issue.
Over the weekend the White House was working the phone lines and preparing for a GOP filibuster, the White House staffers said.
In the end, Munoz and Valencia agreed that the administration had given “very clear marching orders” to get this amendment added to the Department of Defense war appropriations bill, mobilize community organizers much like they did to get President Obama elected and get the DREAM Act signed into law.
Is the conference call legal?
While the White House conference call directive made it clear they were not lobbying for the DREAM Act, the intent was clear- community organizers start mobilizing.
There is a law that prevents White House employees from lobbying particular topics and immigration is clearly a hot-button issue.
Knowing that those in Washington hold a reasonable amount power, legislators drew up the Hatch Act. It was passed into law in 1939 and regulates political activities of federal employees and some state and local government workers.
The legislation originally prohibited nearly all partisan activity by federal employees, banning them from endorsing candidates, distributing campaign literature, organizing political activities and holding posts in partisan organizations.
However, today, most career government employees can run for nonpartisan offices, make financial contributions to political organizations, get involved in political groups, and campaign for candidates by making speeches, distributing literature and signing nominating positions.
The remaining restrictions on federal employees' activities in the political arena are tailored much more narrowly to their jobs; they still are banned from using their authority to exert influence over an election; encourage or discourage political activity by anyone with business before their agency; do political work while on duty, in uniform, in the office or in a government vehicle or run for partisan office.
Political appointees operate under the same rules with some exceptions. They are allowed to engage in and may express opinions about candidates, issues, may attend and be active at political rallies.
Currently White House staffer Valencia, who led the conference call, handles outreach to the Latino community, immigration, and housing groups inside the White House. She also served on the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team and was Deputy Latino Vote Director during Obama’s presidential campaign. The nature of her job lends itself to indirect lobbying, but she is walking a very fine line by expressing action needs to be taken according to the Hatch Act. The same is true for Munoz.
Munoz reached the White House staff via President Obama, she is a known left-leaning Latino activist who was appointed to head the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs. She is a former vice president for National Council of La Raza and is charged with outreach to state and local governments as well as constituency groups.
In addition to her La Raza post, Munoz was also the board chair of Center for Community Change, served on the U.S. Programs Board of the Open Society Institute and the Board of Directors of the Atlantic Philanthropies.
National Council of La Raza is a liberal Hispanic organization that advocates for Latinos who reside in America illegally and pushes for open border legislation as a way to gain a foothold in the U.S. political landscape. The group has been supported by both the Republicans and Democrats who are looking to gain control of America’s fastest growing voter block.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/amnesty-debate-heats-up-with-the-dream-act
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Summer of recovery falls flat in America
This week, President Barack Obama visited the ZBB Energy battery factory in Wisconsin. The 30-employee company manufactures high-tech devices that stores renewable energy and ZBB Energy was also a benefactor of U.S. stimulus dollars.
“Companies like this are showing us how manufacturing can come back right here in the United States of America, right back here to Wisconsin,” Obama explained. “We've been fighting on all fronts - inch by inch, foot by foot, mile by mile - to get this country moving forward again, and going after every single job we can create right here in the United States of America.”
Many restless Americans couldn’t disagree more with the president on the job front as the unemployment rate hovers around 10 percent. The Wisconsin energy company hosted the Obama Energy Department in January when they invested $14 million in the business; the President was present to claim credit for every employee.
However the Wall Street Journal decided to do their homework and found a very different story than the one the Obama Administration was portraying. ZBB Energy went public in June of 2007, and for the past three years ZBB has been hemorrhaging money.
The firm lost $4.9 million in fiscal year 2008, $5.5 million in fiscal year 2009, and has a "cumulative deficit" of $44.1 million, according to the Wall Street Journal. They also admitted that its ability to continue was a growing concern and would be directly tied to an infusion of more cash.
Economists argue that in a free market economy, private investors would invest the money, and either reap the rewards or suffer the losses if ZBB Energy failed. Under President Obama's “new” capitalist economy, ZBB Energy wins while the taxpayer is left holding the bag.
Not one to let the fundamental money making practice to get in the way Obama has decided to move full steam ahead with the Cap and Trade energy push.
“There are folks in Washington right now who think we should abandon our efforts to support clean energy," Obama said.
"They've made the political calculation that it's better to stand on the sidelines than work as a team to help American businesses and American workers. And my answer to people who have been playing politics the past year and a half is, they should come to this plant. They should go to any of the dozen new battery factories, or the new electrical vehicle manufacturers, or the new wind turbine makers, or the solar plants that are popping up all over this country, and they should have to explain why they think these clean energy jobs are better off being made in Germany or China or Spain, instead of right here in the United States."
If that statement was true, these companies would be running cash surpluses and not in the red and wouldn’t require bailout after bailout like ZBB Energy’s $44.1 million deficit shows.
Moving forward it is clear President Obama will stick to his agenda a push for an unproven clean energy market.
"The worst mistake we could make is to go back to doing what we were doing that got us into the mess that we were in," Obama said. "We can't turn back."
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego
“Companies like this are showing us how manufacturing can come back right here in the United States of America, right back here to Wisconsin,” Obama explained. “We've been fighting on all fronts - inch by inch, foot by foot, mile by mile - to get this country moving forward again, and going after every single job we can create right here in the United States of America.”
Many restless Americans couldn’t disagree more with the president on the job front as the unemployment rate hovers around 10 percent. The Wisconsin energy company hosted the Obama Energy Department in January when they invested $14 million in the business; the President was present to claim credit for every employee.
However the Wall Street Journal decided to do their homework and found a very different story than the one the Obama Administration was portraying. ZBB Energy went public in June of 2007, and for the past three years ZBB has been hemorrhaging money.
The firm lost $4.9 million in fiscal year 2008, $5.5 million in fiscal year 2009, and has a "cumulative deficit" of $44.1 million, according to the Wall Street Journal. They also admitted that its ability to continue was a growing concern and would be directly tied to an infusion of more cash.
Economists argue that in a free market economy, private investors would invest the money, and either reap the rewards or suffer the losses if ZBB Energy failed. Under President Obama's “new” capitalist economy, ZBB Energy wins while the taxpayer is left holding the bag.
Not one to let the fundamental money making practice to get in the way Obama has decided to move full steam ahead with the Cap and Trade energy push.
“There are folks in Washington right now who think we should abandon our efforts to support clean energy," Obama said.
"They've made the political calculation that it's better to stand on the sidelines than work as a team to help American businesses and American workers. And my answer to people who have been playing politics the past year and a half is, they should come to this plant. They should go to any of the dozen new battery factories, or the new electrical vehicle manufacturers, or the new wind turbine makers, or the solar plants that are popping up all over this country, and they should have to explain why they think these clean energy jobs are better off being made in Germany or China or Spain, instead of right here in the United States."
If that statement was true, these companies would be running cash surpluses and not in the red and wouldn’t require bailout after bailout like ZBB Energy’s $44.1 million deficit shows.
Moving forward it is clear President Obama will stick to his agenda a push for an unproven clean energy market.
"The worst mistake we could make is to go back to doing what we were doing that got us into the mess that we were in," Obama said. "We can't turn back."
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Showdown in the desert- Arizona vs. Barrack Obama
It’s D-day in the Grand Canyon state. The full force of the federal government, with its deep pockets, will attempt to thwart Arizona from controlling their out-of-control illegal immigration problem.
After weeks of speculation, threats and pandering, the citizens of Arizona will finally have their day in court. The Obama Administration claims Arizona Governor Jan Brewer should be restrained from enforcing AB1070, an illegal immigration law that closely mirrors the federal government’s law, for two main reasons.
The government contends Arizona is pre-empting federal immigration law with the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government and therefore, the states, including Arizona are pre-empted from exercising any jurisdiction over immigration matters, according to US Immigration and Naturalization Activity – Title 8 United States Code §1101 et seq.).
The second claim deals with the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Federal law, when pertaining to the U.S. Constitution and treaties with foreign nations is the Supreme Law of the Law and “trumps” any state action, according to Article VI, Clause 2.
These two legal postulates have been used successfully by the federal government in a wide variety of proceedings to retain the federal government’s exclusive jurisdiction over certain subjects in order to ensure there is uniformity and consistency in the interpretation and execution of U.S. law throughout the federal and state jurisdictions.
For example, U.S. courts have determined that the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction to establish and enforce certain standards in drugs, foods, auto safety, etc., and therefore, the states are “preempted” from exercising jurisdiction over these areas of exclusivity, which would cause confusion and conflict in commerce and law.
Also the government’s case says the Commerce Clause of the Constitution has been widely recognized as the first application of the Supremacy Clause and it continues to be asserted today in the control of the airways for telephone, internet, and emergency broadband and AM/FM broadcasting.
However, it must be noted that Arizona has not directed that local law enforcement personnel screen people at the U.S./Arizona border with Mexico, but rather, it has restricted its application of federal immigration law within state jurisdiction and has not asserted any rights pertaining to the international border with Mexico.
The striking difference with the AB1070 case, is that the U.S. is seeking to restrain the Governor from enforcing Arizona law, exclusively within the jurisdiction of the state, and which is based expressly upon the enforcement provisions for U.S. law enforcement personnel, on the grounds of preemption and Supremacy, as though the Congress and Constitution expressly forbade dual enforcement of U.S. Immigration Law.
In the past the federal and state law enforcement personnel have worked together on immigration matters. The only difference now is that Arizona is now directing its law enforcement personnel to actively pursue immigration inquiries in certain circumstances, as opposed to the prior “dual” jurisdiction with federal officers, wherein an immigration matter arose, as a collateral or inadvertent aspect of a state legal action.
Notwithstanding a strict compliance of AB1070 with current federal immigration laws and regulations, the Obama administration somehow reaches the conclusion that only federal law enforcement is able to enforce federal immigration law without having a “chilling effect” on Arizona’s population, despite a long history of dual jurisdiction.
And lastly, the “chilling effect” would only extend only to illegal immigrants, who have no First Amendment rights, because a citizen of Arizona would be free from any threat of deportation. Therefore the “chilling effect” applies only to illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. illegally, remain in the U.S. illegally and would be subject to deportation on a daily basis.
For illegal immigrants, there is a constant threat of being deported, but certainly enforcement of federal immigration by Arizona law enforcement will not lessen that fear nor abridge any Constitutional protections of Arizona’s legal residents, who are required by law to carry their residency permits.
Some at ICE see Arizona law as a must enforce law
When it comes to the folks who actually are responsible for enforcing the countries’ immigration laws, recently-retired ICE agent John Sakelarides, a 25 year veteran, says the government is falling down on the job when it comes to illegal immigration and protecting the nation’s borders.
"The thrust of the Eric Holder and Barack Obama’s lawsuit against Jan Brewer and the people of the state of Arizona is that Arizona is allegedly usurping federal authority and interfering in the federal government's presumed exclusive authority to determine immigration policy and exclusive authority as to immigration enforcement,” Sakelarides says.
“However, cities such as New York, San Francisco, Denver, and many others, as well as some states have engaged in sanctuary policies which also appear to not only usurp the federal government's presumed exclusive authority to enact immigration policy and enforcement priorities, but they do so in blatant violation of federal criminal law.
“It's an obvious contradiction that cannot be overlooked. The question that has been repeatedly asked is ‘Why are Holder and Obama suing Arizona for trying to enforce the law that the federal government repeatedly refuses to enforce, while they allow cities to actively assist and harbor illegal aliens?’"
"There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law,” Tracy Schmaler, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder told The Washington Times. "That's what Arizona did in this case."
The real answer is that there is absolutely no interest by the Obama administration to enforce the current immigration laws, no interest in securing the border, no interest in honoring the wishes and demands of the people for whom they work for, according to Sakelarides.
“The rationale behind this is that they are seeking political power and hoping to cash in on ‘future democratic votes.’ However, the law prohibits foreign nationals in participating in American elections. The right to vote is an exclusive right reserved to citizens. In fact, if an alien votes in an election, that act is a ground for being deported. It also requires that the alien make a false claim to U.S. citizenship which is a federal felony under 18 USC 911,” Sakelarides summed up.
Members of Congress weigh in
The Arizona lawsuit hasn’t escaped the attention of 81 members of Congress who filed a friend of the court brief supporting Arizona. These bipartisan lawmakers agree Arizona has the right to protect its residents from an avalanche of illegals crossing into the Grand Canyon State seeking refuse from the over-the-top drug cartel violence and a shot of gaining employment.
“Arizona has every right to defend itself against illegal immigration,” said Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA), chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus. “The federal government has failed to live up to its responsibility to enforce federal law concerning immigration, and Arizona's law does not preempt federal statutes. It is time to stop playing politics, roll up our sleeves and get to work on a bipartisan immigration bill that addresses America's border security, goes after employers who exploit illegal immigrants and reduces identity theft.”
Bilbray continued to explain, "I stand by my claim: the bipartisan Immigration Reform Caucus is ready and willing to meet with President Obama to address bipartisan and meaningful immigration reform."
Arizona Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) stated, "President Obama is going to end up having to sue several states, including Rhode Island and others, if the Administration wants to sue everyone who tries to enforce immigration law. This is in addition to the numerous other states who have either introduced legislation similar to Arizona's (such as Michigan, South Carolina, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania,) and as many as 15 others have expressed a desire to pass a law similar to SB 1070.
Furthermore, the Administration's lawsuit is politically disastrous, since more than 55 percent of Americans disagree with the lawsuit. The American people want an effective, enforced federal immigration policy and secure borders. The last thing this ridiculous lawsuit is doing is making our laws more clear or our border more secure, and President Obama must continue to hear that the Members who signed this brief, along with the American people, strongly oppose the ongoing politicization of this serious national security and federal immigration issue."
Ranking Member of the Committee on the Judiciary as well as vocal illegal immigration advocate Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said, "The Obama administration is wrong to sue the State of Arizona. The Arizona law is favored by a majority of Arizonans and Americans. Also the Arizona law mirrors federal law and is only necessary because the Obama administration has failed to do its job. Instead of suing Arizona, the Obama administration should stand up for citizens and legal immigrants enforce our immigration laws and secure the border."
In conclusion
While there are legitimate issues on both sides of the illegal immigration issue one thing remains clear, America is a nation of laws.
The polls also remain crystal clear as the majority of Americans support Arizona’s lawmakers and residents rights to enforce immigration laws.
Another symptom associated with illegal immigration is the cost taxpayers’ end up paying for in food stamps, housing subsidies and health care. Illegal immigration costs the United States an astounding $113 billion a year or an average of $1,117 for every legal resident household in the U.S., according to a recent study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
The study also reported that this the “first and most detailed look at the costs of illegal immigration ever done,” says Bob Dane, director of communications for FAIR.
As the dynamite is about to be lit in the state of Arizona, the immigration fuse may be the precursor to a calamity of upsets in the November mid-term elections.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
After weeks of speculation, threats and pandering, the citizens of Arizona will finally have their day in court. The Obama Administration claims Arizona Governor Jan Brewer should be restrained from enforcing AB1070, an illegal immigration law that closely mirrors the federal government’s law, for two main reasons.
The government contends Arizona is pre-empting federal immigration law with the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government and therefore, the states, including Arizona are pre-empted from exercising any jurisdiction over immigration matters, according to US Immigration and Naturalization Activity – Title 8 United States Code §1101 et seq.).
The second claim deals with the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Federal law, when pertaining to the U.S. Constitution and treaties with foreign nations is the Supreme Law of the Law and “trumps” any state action, according to Article VI, Clause 2.
These two legal postulates have been used successfully by the federal government in a wide variety of proceedings to retain the federal government’s exclusive jurisdiction over certain subjects in order to ensure there is uniformity and consistency in the interpretation and execution of U.S. law throughout the federal and state jurisdictions.
For example, U.S. courts have determined that the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction to establish and enforce certain standards in drugs, foods, auto safety, etc., and therefore, the states are “preempted” from exercising jurisdiction over these areas of exclusivity, which would cause confusion and conflict in commerce and law.
Also the government’s case says the Commerce Clause of the Constitution has been widely recognized as the first application of the Supremacy Clause and it continues to be asserted today in the control of the airways for telephone, internet, and emergency broadband and AM/FM broadcasting.
However, it must be noted that Arizona has not directed that local law enforcement personnel screen people at the U.S./Arizona border with Mexico, but rather, it has restricted its application of federal immigration law within state jurisdiction and has not asserted any rights pertaining to the international border with Mexico.
The striking difference with the AB1070 case, is that the U.S. is seeking to restrain the Governor from enforcing Arizona law, exclusively within the jurisdiction of the state, and which is based expressly upon the enforcement provisions for U.S. law enforcement personnel, on the grounds of preemption and Supremacy, as though the Congress and Constitution expressly forbade dual enforcement of U.S. Immigration Law.
In the past the federal and state law enforcement personnel have worked together on immigration matters. The only difference now is that Arizona is now directing its law enforcement personnel to actively pursue immigration inquiries in certain circumstances, as opposed to the prior “dual” jurisdiction with federal officers, wherein an immigration matter arose, as a collateral or inadvertent aspect of a state legal action.
Notwithstanding a strict compliance of AB1070 with current federal immigration laws and regulations, the Obama administration somehow reaches the conclusion that only federal law enforcement is able to enforce federal immigration law without having a “chilling effect” on Arizona’s population, despite a long history of dual jurisdiction.
And lastly, the “chilling effect” would only extend only to illegal immigrants, who have no First Amendment rights, because a citizen of Arizona would be free from any threat of deportation. Therefore the “chilling effect” applies only to illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. illegally, remain in the U.S. illegally and would be subject to deportation on a daily basis.
For illegal immigrants, there is a constant threat of being deported, but certainly enforcement of federal immigration by Arizona law enforcement will not lessen that fear nor abridge any Constitutional protections of Arizona’s legal residents, who are required by law to carry their residency permits.
Some at ICE see Arizona law as a must enforce law
When it comes to the folks who actually are responsible for enforcing the countries’ immigration laws, recently-retired ICE agent John Sakelarides, a 25 year veteran, says the government is falling down on the job when it comes to illegal immigration and protecting the nation’s borders.
"The thrust of the Eric Holder and Barack Obama’s lawsuit against Jan Brewer and the people of the state of Arizona is that Arizona is allegedly usurping federal authority and interfering in the federal government's presumed exclusive authority to determine immigration policy and exclusive authority as to immigration enforcement,” Sakelarides says.
“However, cities such as New York, San Francisco, Denver, and many others, as well as some states have engaged in sanctuary policies which also appear to not only usurp the federal government's presumed exclusive authority to enact immigration policy and enforcement priorities, but they do so in blatant violation of federal criminal law.
“It's an obvious contradiction that cannot be overlooked. The question that has been repeatedly asked is ‘Why are Holder and Obama suing Arizona for trying to enforce the law that the federal government repeatedly refuses to enforce, while they allow cities to actively assist and harbor illegal aliens?’"
"There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law,” Tracy Schmaler, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder told The Washington Times. "That's what Arizona did in this case."
The real answer is that there is absolutely no interest by the Obama administration to enforce the current immigration laws, no interest in securing the border, no interest in honoring the wishes and demands of the people for whom they work for, according to Sakelarides.
“The rationale behind this is that they are seeking political power and hoping to cash in on ‘future democratic votes.’ However, the law prohibits foreign nationals in participating in American elections. The right to vote is an exclusive right reserved to citizens. In fact, if an alien votes in an election, that act is a ground for being deported. It also requires that the alien make a false claim to U.S. citizenship which is a federal felony under 18 USC 911,” Sakelarides summed up.
Members of Congress weigh in
The Arizona lawsuit hasn’t escaped the attention of 81 members of Congress who filed a friend of the court brief supporting Arizona. These bipartisan lawmakers agree Arizona has the right to protect its residents from an avalanche of illegals crossing into the Grand Canyon State seeking refuse from the over-the-top drug cartel violence and a shot of gaining employment.
“Arizona has every right to defend itself against illegal immigration,” said Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-CA), chairman of the Immigration Reform Caucus. “The federal government has failed to live up to its responsibility to enforce federal law concerning immigration, and Arizona's law does not preempt federal statutes. It is time to stop playing politics, roll up our sleeves and get to work on a bipartisan immigration bill that addresses America's border security, goes after employers who exploit illegal immigrants and reduces identity theft.”
Bilbray continued to explain, "I stand by my claim: the bipartisan Immigration Reform Caucus is ready and willing to meet with President Obama to address bipartisan and meaningful immigration reform."
Arizona Congressman Trent Franks (R-AZ) stated, "President Obama is going to end up having to sue several states, including Rhode Island and others, if the Administration wants to sue everyone who tries to enforce immigration law. This is in addition to the numerous other states who have either introduced legislation similar to Arizona's (such as Michigan, South Carolina, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania,) and as many as 15 others have expressed a desire to pass a law similar to SB 1070.
Furthermore, the Administration's lawsuit is politically disastrous, since more than 55 percent of Americans disagree with the lawsuit. The American people want an effective, enforced federal immigration policy and secure borders. The last thing this ridiculous lawsuit is doing is making our laws more clear or our border more secure, and President Obama must continue to hear that the Members who signed this brief, along with the American people, strongly oppose the ongoing politicization of this serious national security and federal immigration issue."
Ranking Member of the Committee on the Judiciary as well as vocal illegal immigration advocate Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said, "The Obama administration is wrong to sue the State of Arizona. The Arizona law is favored by a majority of Arizonans and Americans. Also the Arizona law mirrors federal law and is only necessary because the Obama administration has failed to do its job. Instead of suing Arizona, the Obama administration should stand up for citizens and legal immigrants enforce our immigration laws and secure the border."
In conclusion
While there are legitimate issues on both sides of the illegal immigration issue one thing remains clear, America is a nation of laws.
The polls also remain crystal clear as the majority of Americans support Arizona’s lawmakers and residents rights to enforce immigration laws.
Another symptom associated with illegal immigration is the cost taxpayers’ end up paying for in food stamps, housing subsidies and health care. Illegal immigration costs the United States an astounding $113 billion a year or an average of $1,117 for every legal resident household in the U.S., according to a recent study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
The study also reported that this the “first and most detailed look at the costs of illegal immigration ever done,” says Bob Dane, director of communications for FAIR.
As the dynamite is about to be lit in the state of Arizona, the immigration fuse may be the precursor to a calamity of upsets in the November mid-term elections.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Obama slams GOP over unemployment benefits which would add billions to the deficit
Now that it’s about 100 days until the midterm elections, the silly season kicked into high gear over the weekend. The usual finger pointing, slamming policies, and claiming the GOP doesn’t like the little guy tactics were employed by Democrats.
The current bull’s-eye target is unemployment benefits. Some unemployed America’s are entering the final 99 weeks they are able to collect insurance money from Uncle Sam, with a continued wobbly economy the President is seeking an extension of those payments.
Kicking it up a notch, Obama took a direct partisan shot at Republicans for failing to pass an extension in unemployment benefits. This politics as usual tactic fell flat as the House and the Senate enjoys large majorities and do not need Republicans to pass along an extension of benefits.
“Over the past few weeks, a majority of Senators have tried – not once, not twice, but three times – to extend emergency relief on a temporary basis. And each time, a partisan minority in the Senate has used parliamentary maneuvers to block a vote, denying millions of people who are out of work much-needed relief. Republican leaders in the Senate are advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job,” the President implored.
Nevertheless this hasn’t stopped the main-stream media from placing the blame squarely on the GOP.
The President also highlighted in a recent speech that many Republicans have previously supported unemployment extensions under Republican administrations but refuse to offer relief to middle class families today.
Contrary to the President’s spin, Republicans support an extension of unemployment benefits, they just question whether the estimated $34 billion cost will be paid for with an stimulus money – as the GOP have proposed – or whether the $34 billion will be added to the nation’s $13 trillion debt – as the Democrats have offered.
Minority Senate leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has introduced legislation on four different occasions in the last month that would extend unemployment benefits and pay for them with unused stimulus funds. But on every occasion, that effort was blocked by Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).
“The biggest reason the cloture vote we just had failed is because Democrats simply refused to pass a bill that does not add to the debt,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.
In November, President Obama made this statement about unemployment benefits; “If it’s fully paid for, and so it is fiscally responsible. Now, it's important to note that the bill I sign will not add to our deficit.”
California Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat, is locked in a bitter race from GOP newcomer Carly Fiorina and votes for deficit spending are just the ammunition the GOP candidate is using against Boxer. Even liberal California sees the writing on the wall – the country is broke.
“While Barbara Boxer toes the party line and rubberstamps Harry Reid’s reckless tax-and-spend agenda in Washington, she has failed to make the tough economic decisions that Californians who are struggling to make ends meet deserve. Instead of living within their means like California families and small businesses are forced to do each year, Boxer and her party leaders in Washington believe that taxpayers should pick up the tab for the government’s maxed out credit card,” said Amber Marchand, NRSC Press Secretary.
“This November, there’s no doubt that voters will hold Senator Boxer accountable for her out-of-control spending agenda when they elect Carly Fiorina to the U.S. Senate,” Marchand finished.
Even Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) said unemployment benefits must be offset in a Senate floor speech. “This adds up to a 20-week extension of unemployed benefits for those in the toughest job markets…this should not increase the deficit or national debt.”
However, President Obama believes the country must continue to do everything to spur growth and hiring. “I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created,” he said from the White House Rose Garden.
“But even as we work to jumpstart job-growth in the private sector, get businesses hiring, and dig ourselves out of this economic hole, we also have another responsibility – to offer emergency relief to Americans who’ve been laid off in this recession; to help them make ends meet – and support their families – while they’re looking for another job,” Obama explained.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The current bull’s-eye target is unemployment benefits. Some unemployed America’s are entering the final 99 weeks they are able to collect insurance money from Uncle Sam, with a continued wobbly economy the President is seeking an extension of those payments.
Kicking it up a notch, Obama took a direct partisan shot at Republicans for failing to pass an extension in unemployment benefits. This politics as usual tactic fell flat as the House and the Senate enjoys large majorities and do not need Republicans to pass along an extension of benefits.
“Over the past few weeks, a majority of Senators have tried – not once, not twice, but three times – to extend emergency relief on a temporary basis. And each time, a partisan minority in the Senate has used parliamentary maneuvers to block a vote, denying millions of people who are out of work much-needed relief. Republican leaders in the Senate are advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job,” the President implored.
Nevertheless this hasn’t stopped the main-stream media from placing the blame squarely on the GOP.
The President also highlighted in a recent speech that many Republicans have previously supported unemployment extensions under Republican administrations but refuse to offer relief to middle class families today.
Contrary to the President’s spin, Republicans support an extension of unemployment benefits, they just question whether the estimated $34 billion cost will be paid for with an stimulus money – as the GOP have proposed – or whether the $34 billion will be added to the nation’s $13 trillion debt – as the Democrats have offered.
Minority Senate leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has introduced legislation on four different occasions in the last month that would extend unemployment benefits and pay for them with unused stimulus funds. But on every occasion, that effort was blocked by Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).
“The biggest reason the cloture vote we just had failed is because Democrats simply refused to pass a bill that does not add to the debt,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.
In November, President Obama made this statement about unemployment benefits; “If it’s fully paid for, and so it is fiscally responsible. Now, it's important to note that the bill I sign will not add to our deficit.”
California Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat, is locked in a bitter race from GOP newcomer Carly Fiorina and votes for deficit spending are just the ammunition the GOP candidate is using against Boxer. Even liberal California sees the writing on the wall – the country is broke.
“While Barbara Boxer toes the party line and rubberstamps Harry Reid’s reckless tax-and-spend agenda in Washington, she has failed to make the tough economic decisions that Californians who are struggling to make ends meet deserve. Instead of living within their means like California families and small businesses are forced to do each year, Boxer and her party leaders in Washington believe that taxpayers should pick up the tab for the government’s maxed out credit card,” said Amber Marchand, NRSC Press Secretary.
“This November, there’s no doubt that voters will hold Senator Boxer accountable for her out-of-control spending agenda when they elect Carly Fiorina to the U.S. Senate,” Marchand finished.
Even Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) said unemployment benefits must be offset in a Senate floor speech. “This adds up to a 20-week extension of unemployed benefits for those in the toughest job markets…this should not increase the deficit or national debt.”
However, President Obama believes the country must continue to do everything to spur growth and hiring. “I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created,” he said from the White House Rose Garden.
“But even as we work to jumpstart job-growth in the private sector, get businesses hiring, and dig ourselves out of this economic hole, we also have another responsibility – to offer emergency relief to Americans who’ve been laid off in this recession; to help them make ends meet – and support their families – while they’re looking for another job,” Obama explained.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Sunday, June 27, 2010
A swipe of the pen from Obama equals amnesty
Americans are mad. They are mad at the sluggish economy, they are mad at the gulf oil spill and they are mad that President Obama continues to make mistake after mistake. Luckily for the President, he had the longest honeymoon period of any president in recent history. Unfortunately for the President, Americans are waking up from their slumber, paying attention and it isn’t good news.
When it comes to the illegal immigration issue the majority of legal residents will not accept rewarding those who have broken at least one law. While most states face double-digit unemployment, busted budgets and deteriorating infrastructure, Democrats remain undeterred and march toward amnesty as a way to boost their voting block. This may explain the new Wall Street Journal poll which found 62 percent of Americans think the country is on the wrong track.
If the Obama administration attempts to deem illegal immigration (amnesty) into law, voters will certainly lament their feelings at the voting booth in November.
Former 25-year veteran of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent John Sakelarides sums up the facts and myths when it comes to this complex and divisive illegal immigration issue.
“There are indications that the Obama ‘Administration’ is planning to give deferred action to anywhere from 12 to 40 million illegal aliens in the United States, or, in the alternative, to parole these illegal aliens into the U.S. for ‘humanitarian’ reasons.’ This would be accomplished by Executive Order, thereby bypassing Congress and the rule of law.”
The Constitutionality of such an order would certainly be challenged in the Courts. The reason is simple. If this Executive Order were allowed to remain in effect, it would transform our Constitutional Republic into a Dictatorship where the Chief Executive Officer would dictate what laws would be enforced, which ones would be ignored and how things would work in our country.
In an effort to stave off what would certainly be a Constitutional mess, Senator Orin Hatch and others have sent a letter to Mr. Obama, strongly urging him not to embark on such a course of action. The Senators are requesting a commitment from the ‘Administration’ that they will not seek to grant deferred action or parole to all of the illegal aliens in the United States.
This White House is deliberately, willfully, knowingly, and possibly maliciously, ignoring the will of the vast majority of Americans and is H*ll bent on transforming this Constitutional Republic into a Socialist State. What this "President" is doing violates his oath of office. He is deliberately ignoring the Constitution in favor of "social justice."
President Obama, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid rammed through "Obamacare" despite overwhelming numbers of Americans voicing their opposition to such an audacious government take over. They rammed through the "stimulus" package, the government takeover of GM and Chrysler, and now "Banking Reform." All of these "socialist" initiatives have been implemented against the will of the American people. As such, Americans have a leader ruling by executive decree occupying the White House and Congress.
Their agenda? A global socialist agenda.
Americans should not be surprised by this action because candidate Obama said he would fundamentally change the country.
When one thinks about it, Barack Obama is the quintessential Globalist. Regardless of where he was born, his formative years were spent outside the United States. As such, he never experienced growing up in America.
And the time he did spend in the U.S. was in Hawaii, which is arguably, is far removed from the mainstream and mainland of the United States. The President never experienced Little League, sandlot baseball, barbecues, picnics, American holidays such as Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Veterans Day, etc. So it is no wonder he is aloof and out of touch with the American heartland. Not until his Occidental College days and beyond did he live in the U.S. mainland.
Obama has, for all intents and purposes, been groomed to be a Globalist. He simply "does not get it" when it comes to being an American. Perhaps that is why he is so quick to give $400 million of taxpayer money to the Palestinians, aka: Hamas, and nothing to Americans suffering through the country’s worst environmental disaster along the Gulf Coast.
Some political cynics believe that this amnesty proclamation is designed to take attention away from the BP Oil spill and divert it to another hot button issue. Regardless of the spin one puts on this, it is painfully obvious that this administration abhors the Constitution and will do what it wants - even if it means dismissing the American people.
Click here to read the letter to President Obama from Senator Hatch and others; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m6d24-Forget-Congress--Obama-may-sign-amnesty-by-executive-order
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
When it comes to the illegal immigration issue the majority of legal residents will not accept rewarding those who have broken at least one law. While most states face double-digit unemployment, busted budgets and deteriorating infrastructure, Democrats remain undeterred and march toward amnesty as a way to boost their voting block. This may explain the new Wall Street Journal poll which found 62 percent of Americans think the country is on the wrong track.
If the Obama administration attempts to deem illegal immigration (amnesty) into law, voters will certainly lament their feelings at the voting booth in November.
Former 25-year veteran of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent John Sakelarides sums up the facts and myths when it comes to this complex and divisive illegal immigration issue.
“There are indications that the Obama ‘Administration’ is planning to give deferred action to anywhere from 12 to 40 million illegal aliens in the United States, or, in the alternative, to parole these illegal aliens into the U.S. for ‘humanitarian’ reasons.’ This would be accomplished by Executive Order, thereby bypassing Congress and the rule of law.”
The Constitutionality of such an order would certainly be challenged in the Courts. The reason is simple. If this Executive Order were allowed to remain in effect, it would transform our Constitutional Republic into a Dictatorship where the Chief Executive Officer would dictate what laws would be enforced, which ones would be ignored and how things would work in our country.
In an effort to stave off what would certainly be a Constitutional mess, Senator Orin Hatch and others have sent a letter to Mr. Obama, strongly urging him not to embark on such a course of action. The Senators are requesting a commitment from the ‘Administration’ that they will not seek to grant deferred action or parole to all of the illegal aliens in the United States.
This White House is deliberately, willfully, knowingly, and possibly maliciously, ignoring the will of the vast majority of Americans and is H*ll bent on transforming this Constitutional Republic into a Socialist State. What this "President" is doing violates his oath of office. He is deliberately ignoring the Constitution in favor of "social justice."
President Obama, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid rammed through "Obamacare" despite overwhelming numbers of Americans voicing their opposition to such an audacious government take over. They rammed through the "stimulus" package, the government takeover of GM and Chrysler, and now "Banking Reform." All of these "socialist" initiatives have been implemented against the will of the American people. As such, Americans have a leader ruling by executive decree occupying the White House and Congress.
Their agenda? A global socialist agenda.
Americans should not be surprised by this action because candidate Obama said he would fundamentally change the country.
When one thinks about it, Barack Obama is the quintessential Globalist. Regardless of where he was born, his formative years were spent outside the United States. As such, he never experienced growing up in America.
And the time he did spend in the U.S. was in Hawaii, which is arguably, is far removed from the mainstream and mainland of the United States. The President never experienced Little League, sandlot baseball, barbecues, picnics, American holidays such as Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Veterans Day, etc. So it is no wonder he is aloof and out of touch with the American heartland. Not until his Occidental College days and beyond did he live in the U.S. mainland.
Obama has, for all intents and purposes, been groomed to be a Globalist. He simply "does not get it" when it comes to being an American. Perhaps that is why he is so quick to give $400 million of taxpayer money to the Palestinians, aka: Hamas, and nothing to Americans suffering through the country’s worst environmental disaster along the Gulf Coast.
Some political cynics believe that this amnesty proclamation is designed to take attention away from the BP Oil spill and divert it to another hot button issue. Regardless of the spin one puts on this, it is painfully obvious that this administration abhors the Constitution and will do what it wants - even if it means dismissing the American people.
Click here to read the letter to President Obama from Senator Hatch and others; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m6d24-Forget-Congress--Obama-may-sign-amnesty-by-executive-order
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Friday, June 11, 2010
Palestinians to be on the receiving end of $400 million in aid
After a rough couple of weeks in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinians, President Obama promises Palestine’s President Mahmoud Abbas $400 million in aid after their meeting this week.
The two heads of state met in Washington a week after an Israeli military operation involving a flotilla caused an international incident in which militant activists and aid workers tried to break a blockade of the Gaza Strip. The event left nine people dead including an American on a Turkish-flagged ship.
According to Israel the blockade was needed to keep weapons out of the hands of Gaza's Hamas rulers. However, critics claim it has blocked contact with the outside world causing unnecessary stress for Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinians.
The additional aid came after President Obama called the situation in Gaza “unsustainable” and hoped the $400 million increase would improve living conditions for Palestinians living in the Strip and West Bank.
“I think increasingly you're seeing debates within Israel recognizing the problems with the status quo,” Obama said. “So President Abbas and I had very extensive discussions about how we could help to promote a better approach to Gaza.”
Israelis live under constant threat from the terrorist organization Hamas and Iran who would like to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth.
The American government currently gives Palestinians approximately $500 million per year and the money passes through nongovernment organizations ensuring Hamas doesn’t get any of the aid money.
The Palestinian President came to the White House to shore up a U.S.-brokered proximately talk with the Israeli government.
The president said he hoped both sides would recognize each others' advances. For the Israelis, Obama said success means “curbing settlement activity and recognizing some of the progress that has been made by the Palestinian Authority when it comes to issues like security. It means on the Palestinian side, and I was very frank with President Abbas that we have to continue to make more progress on both security as well as incitement issues.”
Abbas went on to claim the Palestinians had “nothing to do with incitement against Israel.”
President Obama plans to have Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House by end of the month to wrap up the peace talk details between the two countries.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
The two heads of state met in Washington a week after an Israeli military operation involving a flotilla caused an international incident in which militant activists and aid workers tried to break a blockade of the Gaza Strip. The event left nine people dead including an American on a Turkish-flagged ship.
According to Israel the blockade was needed to keep weapons out of the hands of Gaza's Hamas rulers. However, critics claim it has blocked contact with the outside world causing unnecessary stress for Gaza's 1.5 million Palestinians.
The additional aid came after President Obama called the situation in Gaza “unsustainable” and hoped the $400 million increase would improve living conditions for Palestinians living in the Strip and West Bank.
“I think increasingly you're seeing debates within Israel recognizing the problems with the status quo,” Obama said. “So President Abbas and I had very extensive discussions about how we could help to promote a better approach to Gaza.”
Israelis live under constant threat from the terrorist organization Hamas and Iran who would like to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth.
The American government currently gives Palestinians approximately $500 million per year and the money passes through nongovernment organizations ensuring Hamas doesn’t get any of the aid money.
The Palestinian President came to the White House to shore up a U.S.-brokered proximately talk with the Israeli government.
The president said he hoped both sides would recognize each others' advances. For the Israelis, Obama said success means “curbing settlement activity and recognizing some of the progress that has been made by the Palestinian Authority when it comes to issues like security. It means on the Palestinian side, and I was very frank with President Abbas that we have to continue to make more progress on both security as well as incitement issues.”
Abbas went on to claim the Palestinians had “nothing to do with incitement against Israel.”
President Obama plans to have Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House by end of the month to wrap up the peace talk details between the two countries.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Monday, February 1, 2010
House of Death, DEA Agent Leonhart and an Obama nomination
It’s been more than a year since Obama took office and his administration has been slow to fill top cabinet posts throughout the government. Many of Obama’s nominees failed the routine vetting process for a variety of reasons including; non-payment of taxes, communist leanings, illegally eavesdropping and now covering-up a 12-murder spree along the U.S./Mexico border.
Michele M. Leonhart is the acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration within the Department of Justice and the president is looking to make her post permanent.
“The skill and dedication of these individuals will make them valued additions to my administration, and I look forward to working with them in the coming months and years,” said Obama in a press release.
Special Agent Leonhart has served in senior management roles in DEA headquarters as well as many Field Divisions across the U.S. Leonhart was also DEA’s first female Special Agent in Charge (“SAC”) and later became the SAC for the third largest field division, the DEA office in Los Angeles. She first joined the DEA in 1980 as a Special Agent in Minneapolis and St. Louis until moving up the DEA's supervisory ranks in 1988.
It all looks good on paper, but when the vetting process begins to unravel, Leonhart’s competency comes apart at the seams.
The House of Death in Juarez Mexico
The House of Death is synonymous with torture, murder, cover-up and corruption in the highest order. The single most concerning aspect of this isn’t the murder itself, but rather the fact that the U.S. government not only knew about the dozen murders, but it directed an ICE informant to continue to collect information regarding a big Juarez cartel player, Heriberto Santillan-Tabares.
It is worth pointing out that there was already a pending drug case on Santillan (a top lieutenant of the drug cartel in Juarez) before the murders happened at the House of Death. In the end, he would be sent to prison for more than 25 years on the original drug charges, not for the murders he authorized and was charged with in the superseding indictment of February 18, 2004.
The House of Death case was spiraling out of control in El Paso. In testimony at former DEA El Paso SAC Sandalio Gonzalez’ discrimination trial in federal court, current Acting Administrator Leonhart acknowledged under oath that she notified Attorney General Ashcroft about the House of Death, and then DEA Administrator Karen Tandy did so as well. Tandy also testified to the fact the House of Death case was being handled at the highest levels of the Department of Justice.
In the end it would be the SAC from the DEA office in El Paso who would blow the whistle on this little shop of horrors after fellow DEA agents, residing in Juarez, were put in harm’s way. This led to the complete evacuation of DEA personnel in Juarez.
Sandalio Gonzalez, the DEA special agent in charge of El Paso ended the nonsense and fired off a four-page letter to his counterpart at ICE (John Gaudioso) as well as U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton. The fiery letter blasted those involved with the murder spree in Mexico under the guise of drug trafficking undercover infiltration of the Juarez cartel. The letter also did something nobody in DEA, ICE, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice wanted – provide a paper trail.
The letter laid out the case of travesty that U.S. law enforcement agencies overstepped their bounds and allowed 12 murders to take place. Adding fuel to the fire Gonzalez was reprimanded for writing the letter about the shenanigans at the House of Death. He would be removed from the House of Death case by his superiors in Washington and ordered not to talk about it to the press.
This would not be the end of Gonzalez’ involvement in the House of Death. During sworn testimony at his civil trial for workplace retaliation, Leonhart claimed that Gonzalez should have cleared the letter with her office prior to sending it. This would be her first lie under oath. As a SAC for DEA, Gonzalez was completely within his power to write a letter to his counterpart at ICE and to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, about the obvious mishandling of an investigation involving a dozen murders.
Lie number two would come in the context of this, “I remember occasions when he (Gonzalez) would have issues with the U.S. Attorney’s office and would even show me a draft letter before he went and sent it or would talk to headquarters and get some guidance before he would send it.” This was news to Gonzalez and he made it crystal clear in his rebuttal testimony that was not DEA protocol because he was a Senior DEA Executive in charge of a Field Division. This gave him the authority to sign official correspondence on behalf of DEA in his division.
The criticism didn’t stop with Leonhart. Catherine O'Neil, director of the DOJ's Organized Crime Task Force, described Gonzalez’ letter as “inflammatory.” O’Neil was compelled to pass on U.S. Attorney Sutton's fears to the Attorney General, John Ashcroft as well as DEA Administrator Karen Tandy. (Link to letter http://www.advocatescouncil.us/pdf/Letter2BICE-Sutton_HouseOfDeath.pdf )
Tandy explains she was horrified by Gonzalez' letter. “I apologized to Johnny Sutton last night and he and I agreed on a ‘no comment’ to the press,” she stated in an email.
Leonhart, the current Deputy Administrator of DEA, further explains her frustration in court testimony; “Mr. Gonzalez, by writing the letter [to his counterpart at ICE and U.S. Attorney Sutton], it was at an inappropriate time, it was inflammable. It was nothing new. It was information that we already knew and had relayed to the highest levels of the DOJ, Department of Justice and ICE.” Begging the question if all the players in D.C. knew about the murderous rampage why did they do nothing to shut the operation down?
Even with Leonhart and other present and former DEA top executives testifying against him under oath, in December 2006 the jury in Gonzalez’ civil action ruled in his favor by finding that the DEA had retaliated against him in violation of the federal Civil Rights Act.
House of Death blows up
The event that would shut down the operation in Juarez was a credible threat to DEA agents by corrupt Juarez police and paranoid drug cartel leaders. “Because I'm the deputy administrator, when there are critical incidents or serious matters, I'm briefed very often by the chief of operations. And it was brought to my attention that we had an agent and his family pulled over by a Mexican police officer and some other individuals [on Jan. 14, 2004], and I was also advised that we believed that those people had been to his [the DEA agent’s] home earlier,” Leonhart said on the record.
Once the fallout settled Washington ordered a Joint Assessment Team (JAT) consisting of both ICE and DEA personnel, which interviewed more than 40 participants on both sides of the border.
In essence, it is believed that the JAT report details the government’s complicity in the House of Death murders, which, it could be argued, essentially makes the U.S. government a co-conspirator in the homicides along with Santillan’s narco-trafficking cell in Juarez.
A letter from DEA headquarters in Washington and the Department of Justice, to U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton’s office is proof that the JAT report does in fact exist. It also shows that Washington was concerned enough about a possible public relations disaster and then they buried the JAT report and settled their case against Santillan in a plea deal which didn’t include any murder charges.
The memorandum read, “This is a partial response to your letter of April 6, 2004, to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) El Paso Division Special Agent in Charge Sandalio Gonzalez concerning the captioned [Santillan] case. In that letter you requested any and all impeaching or otherwise exculpatory information relating to two essential witnesses for the Government (namely), Eduardo Ramirez, a.k.a Lalo [the ICE informant] (and) Jose Jaime Marquez [Ramirez’ assistant in the House of Death murders].
More specifically, this memorandum is in response to paragraph 10 of your letter in which you requested ‘(a) copy of the final report, any internal memorandum or other documents prepared by the joint management inquiry team [the DEA/ICE Joint Assessment Team].’ Please note that the enclosed final report also includes a ‘Joint Assessment Team Timeline,’ which is referenced in paragraph “9” of your letter. This report is being provided to you in its entirety because we fully appreciate your office’s need to review all potentially relevant information with regard to the Santillan-Tabares case, and we understand that disclosure of this information outside of the United States Attorney’s office will not be made without further notification to, and consultation with, DEA,” the memo states.
It was expected that Sutton would have shut down the case after the first murder, according to Bill Weaver, a law professor at the University of Texas at El Paso who has written extensively about the murder case. Sutton should have told ICE to “go with what you have, and let's try to bring Santillan to justice.”
The letter from Washington makes it very clear to Sutton’s office that great efforts are needed to assure the JAT report did not fall into the hands of Santillan’s lawyer or otherwise become public. And, as a matter of fact, Santillan’s case never did go to trial. A pending case on Santillan for drug charges would be used to send him to prison for more than 25 years. He would not face the murder charges that he authorized and was charged with in the superseding indictment of February 18, 2004. In essence, Sutton cut a plea deal with him, dropping all the murder charges and assuring that the JAT report never saw the light of day.
The Washington letter directly links U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, to the House of Death cover-up and proves that his office is in possession of the JAT report that could expose the Bush Administration’s complicity in a dozen murders in Juarez, Mexico. There have been several Freedom of Information Act requests filed to get the JAT report, but none have been successful and the report remains buried in Washington D.C.
Further court testimony explains who was notified once the House of Death came to an end and of the plan in place with the acknowledged approval of the attorney general on how to handle the investigation of what events occurred in Ciudad Juarez.
Leonhart describes what happened next. “We notified the attorney general of the United States and the deputy attorney general of the United States [James Comey] of what we had learned and the events and our concerns. We told him that we had talked to customs and let them know what we had found out. Our administrator [DEA’s Karen Tandy] had also contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office [Sutton in San Antonio], and we thought the best thing we could do is get the agencies together, put an independent review team together to go down and find the facts because the person I was talking to said he had a different set of facts and didn't see it the way that we saw it.”
When asked if the case was being handled at the highest levels of government Leonhart’s replies, “absolutely.” She then goes on to place the blame for the House of Death murder spree on ICE. “Yes, it was ICE’s fault.”
Another glitch on the resume
This dubious death case is not the only question mark in Leonhart’s DEA resume. She had an association with super-snitch Andrew Chambers. This informant who reported to Leonhart directly cost taxpayers $2.2 million. During his tenure working for Leonhart, he was caught perjuring himself repeatedly.
“The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals called him (Chambers) a liar and the 8th Circuit of Court of Appeals echoed that verdict two years later.”
According to StopTheDrugWar.org Leonhart continued to use Chambers and the DEA protected him. “The DEA protected him, failing to notify prosecutors and defense attorneys about his record. At one point, DEA and the Justice Department for 17 months stalled a public defender seeking to examine the results of DEA's background check on Chambers. Even after the agency knew its snitch was rotten, it refused to stop using Chambers, and it took the intervention of then Attorney General Janet Reno to force the agency to quit using him.
When Leonhart was repeatedly questioned about Chambers regarding his credibility problems, and if the agency should stop using him, she replied, "That would be a sad day for DEA, and a sad day for anybody in the law enforcement world. He's one in a million. In my career, I'll probably never come across another Andrew."
Another Leonhart shocking statement about Chambers includes this, "The only criticism (of Chambers) I've ever heard is what defense attorneys will characterize as perjury or a lie on the stand.” She goes on to say Chambers “is an outstanding testifier." Really?
The House of Death and non-trustworthy informant, Chambers, provide a pattern for critics and directly questions Leonhart’s ability to reliably make important decisions.
The beginning of the end for the House of Death
As a result of conflicting reports about the situation by both DEA and ICE, the Joint Assessment Team was convened to review the situation. According to Gonzalez, he was blocked from gaining a copy of the report, though during his civil trial then Deputy Administrator Leonhart stated he had been informed he’d get a copy of it. Gonzalez, who retired in 2005, never saw the JAT report even though he was the DEA SAC in El Paso, and the team putting together the report questioned him directly.
Gonzalez believes, “They (ICE and DEA) needed to get their stories straight. It was clear that DEA and ICE had a strained relationship and there was a lot of finger pointing, but in the end DEA was out of the loop. We had the wisdom to deactivate Lalo when he tried to cross the U.S. border with 100 pounds of marijuana, however; ICE kept him around.”
At this point, former U.S. Attorney Pete Nunez said, “Heads should have rolled in this case.” Yet no high-ranking U.S. officials lost their jobs, nor were they prosecuted.
In April of 2004 a plea agreement was reached regarding the murders in the House of Death case. The cartel leader, Santillan pled guilty to drug trafficking while the murder charges were dropped.
Sutton’s involvement with the House of Death would not be the last high profile case he would be in charge of. He was directly involved with the Ramos and Compean case in which two Border Patrol Agents were convicted of shooting a drug dealer illegally and for their mishandling of the case they received 10-11 years of prison time. (President Bush would later commute their sentences on his last day in office).
“This case (Ramos-Compean) was a skunk. It had a terrible odor,” explains Congressman Walter B. Jones-R NC. “I always wondered why there was no investigation in this matter and why the Mexican Government had so much sway in this American case involving Border Patrol Agents.”
For Congressman Jones and a few other Congressional members the story is becoming increasingly clear, referring to the House of Death. “This conspiracy, corruption and cover-up screams for immediate Congressional investigation.”
“Wrong is wrong, and after reading more about this case it was expected that Sutton would have shut down the House of Death case after the first murder. He did not. We need to remember we are a nation of laws,” Jones finished.
The fact remains that Gonzalez’ letter guaranteed an honest agent put something on record confronting the issue of murder itself. That could not be buried as it was his memo, unlike the JAT team report, the official interagency report, which remains buried to this date. The result is a full cover up of murder with conspiracy to cover-up accessories to murder and obstruction of justice all the way up DHS and DOJ.
With the nomination of the top DEA post by President Obama, Leonhart and the circumstances surrounding the House of Death require a full investigation. If this case was indeed mishandled, Leonhart was a big player smack dab in the middle of a cover up of a murder spree in a foreign country.
Why do mainstream media and many Washington players ignore the fact the U.S. government consented to a dozen gruesome murders? In Mexico murder may be the norm, but in America the rule of law rules the day. Yet, Congress and the media continue to waste time with the college football championships and baseball stars that use steroids. America is screaming for change in Washington, perhaps this DEA appointment by Obama will shed some light on a dark period in American history.
Part two will post tomorrow.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Michele M. Leonhart is the acting administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration within the Department of Justice and the president is looking to make her post permanent.
“The skill and dedication of these individuals will make them valued additions to my administration, and I look forward to working with them in the coming months and years,” said Obama in a press release.
Special Agent Leonhart has served in senior management roles in DEA headquarters as well as many Field Divisions across the U.S. Leonhart was also DEA’s first female Special Agent in Charge (“SAC”) and later became the SAC for the third largest field division, the DEA office in Los Angeles. She first joined the DEA in 1980 as a Special Agent in Minneapolis and St. Louis until moving up the DEA's supervisory ranks in 1988.
It all looks good on paper, but when the vetting process begins to unravel, Leonhart’s competency comes apart at the seams.
The House of Death in Juarez Mexico
The House of Death is synonymous with torture, murder, cover-up and corruption in the highest order. The single most concerning aspect of this isn’t the murder itself, but rather the fact that the U.S. government not only knew about the dozen murders, but it directed an ICE informant to continue to collect information regarding a big Juarez cartel player, Heriberto Santillan-Tabares.
It is worth pointing out that there was already a pending drug case on Santillan (a top lieutenant of the drug cartel in Juarez) before the murders happened at the House of Death. In the end, he would be sent to prison for more than 25 years on the original drug charges, not for the murders he authorized and was charged with in the superseding indictment of February 18, 2004.
The House of Death case was spiraling out of control in El Paso. In testimony at former DEA El Paso SAC Sandalio Gonzalez’ discrimination trial in federal court, current Acting Administrator Leonhart acknowledged under oath that she notified Attorney General Ashcroft about the House of Death, and then DEA Administrator Karen Tandy did so as well. Tandy also testified to the fact the House of Death case was being handled at the highest levels of the Department of Justice.
In the end it would be the SAC from the DEA office in El Paso who would blow the whistle on this little shop of horrors after fellow DEA agents, residing in Juarez, were put in harm’s way. This led to the complete evacuation of DEA personnel in Juarez.
Sandalio Gonzalez, the DEA special agent in charge of El Paso ended the nonsense and fired off a four-page letter to his counterpart at ICE (John Gaudioso) as well as U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton. The fiery letter blasted those involved with the murder spree in Mexico under the guise of drug trafficking undercover infiltration of the Juarez cartel. The letter also did something nobody in DEA, ICE, Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice wanted – provide a paper trail.
The letter laid out the case of travesty that U.S. law enforcement agencies overstepped their bounds and allowed 12 murders to take place. Adding fuel to the fire Gonzalez was reprimanded for writing the letter about the shenanigans at the House of Death. He would be removed from the House of Death case by his superiors in Washington and ordered not to talk about it to the press.
This would not be the end of Gonzalez’ involvement in the House of Death. During sworn testimony at his civil trial for workplace retaliation, Leonhart claimed that Gonzalez should have cleared the letter with her office prior to sending it. This would be her first lie under oath. As a SAC for DEA, Gonzalez was completely within his power to write a letter to his counterpart at ICE and to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, about the obvious mishandling of an investigation involving a dozen murders.
Lie number two would come in the context of this, “I remember occasions when he (Gonzalez) would have issues with the U.S. Attorney’s office and would even show me a draft letter before he went and sent it or would talk to headquarters and get some guidance before he would send it.” This was news to Gonzalez and he made it crystal clear in his rebuttal testimony that was not DEA protocol because he was a Senior DEA Executive in charge of a Field Division. This gave him the authority to sign official correspondence on behalf of DEA in his division.
The criticism didn’t stop with Leonhart. Catherine O'Neil, director of the DOJ's Organized Crime Task Force, described Gonzalez’ letter as “inflammatory.” O’Neil was compelled to pass on U.S. Attorney Sutton's fears to the Attorney General, John Ashcroft as well as DEA Administrator Karen Tandy. (Link to letter http://www.advocatescouncil.us/pdf/Letter2BICE-Sutton_HouseOfDeath.pdf )
Tandy explains she was horrified by Gonzalez' letter. “I apologized to Johnny Sutton last night and he and I agreed on a ‘no comment’ to the press,” she stated in an email.
Leonhart, the current Deputy Administrator of DEA, further explains her frustration in court testimony; “Mr. Gonzalez, by writing the letter [to his counterpart at ICE and U.S. Attorney Sutton], it was at an inappropriate time, it was inflammable. It was nothing new. It was information that we already knew and had relayed to the highest levels of the DOJ, Department of Justice and ICE.” Begging the question if all the players in D.C. knew about the murderous rampage why did they do nothing to shut the operation down?
Even with Leonhart and other present and former DEA top executives testifying against him under oath, in December 2006 the jury in Gonzalez’ civil action ruled in his favor by finding that the DEA had retaliated against him in violation of the federal Civil Rights Act.
House of Death blows up
The event that would shut down the operation in Juarez was a credible threat to DEA agents by corrupt Juarez police and paranoid drug cartel leaders. “Because I'm the deputy administrator, when there are critical incidents or serious matters, I'm briefed very often by the chief of operations. And it was brought to my attention that we had an agent and his family pulled over by a Mexican police officer and some other individuals [on Jan. 14, 2004], and I was also advised that we believed that those people had been to his [the DEA agent’s] home earlier,” Leonhart said on the record.
Once the fallout settled Washington ordered a Joint Assessment Team (JAT) consisting of both ICE and DEA personnel, which interviewed more than 40 participants on both sides of the border.
In essence, it is believed that the JAT report details the government’s complicity in the House of Death murders, which, it could be argued, essentially makes the U.S. government a co-conspirator in the homicides along with Santillan’s narco-trafficking cell in Juarez.
A letter from DEA headquarters in Washington and the Department of Justice, to U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton’s office is proof that the JAT report does in fact exist. It also shows that Washington was concerned enough about a possible public relations disaster and then they buried the JAT report and settled their case against Santillan in a plea deal which didn’t include any murder charges.
The memorandum read, “This is a partial response to your letter of April 6, 2004, to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) El Paso Division Special Agent in Charge Sandalio Gonzalez concerning the captioned [Santillan] case. In that letter you requested any and all impeaching or otherwise exculpatory information relating to two essential witnesses for the Government (namely), Eduardo Ramirez, a.k.a Lalo [the ICE informant] (and) Jose Jaime Marquez [Ramirez’ assistant in the House of Death murders].
More specifically, this memorandum is in response to paragraph 10 of your letter in which you requested ‘(a) copy of the final report, any internal memorandum or other documents prepared by the joint management inquiry team [the DEA/ICE Joint Assessment Team].’ Please note that the enclosed final report also includes a ‘Joint Assessment Team Timeline,’ which is referenced in paragraph “9” of your letter. This report is being provided to you in its entirety because we fully appreciate your office’s need to review all potentially relevant information with regard to the Santillan-Tabares case, and we understand that disclosure of this information outside of the United States Attorney’s office will not be made without further notification to, and consultation with, DEA,” the memo states.
It was expected that Sutton would have shut down the case after the first murder, according to Bill Weaver, a law professor at the University of Texas at El Paso who has written extensively about the murder case. Sutton should have told ICE to “go with what you have, and let's try to bring Santillan to justice.”
The letter from Washington makes it very clear to Sutton’s office that great efforts are needed to assure the JAT report did not fall into the hands of Santillan’s lawyer or otherwise become public. And, as a matter of fact, Santillan’s case never did go to trial. A pending case on Santillan for drug charges would be used to send him to prison for more than 25 years. He would not face the murder charges that he authorized and was charged with in the superseding indictment of February 18, 2004. In essence, Sutton cut a plea deal with him, dropping all the murder charges and assuring that the JAT report never saw the light of day.
The Washington letter directly links U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, to the House of Death cover-up and proves that his office is in possession of the JAT report that could expose the Bush Administration’s complicity in a dozen murders in Juarez, Mexico. There have been several Freedom of Information Act requests filed to get the JAT report, but none have been successful and the report remains buried in Washington D.C.
Further court testimony explains who was notified once the House of Death came to an end and of the plan in place with the acknowledged approval of the attorney general on how to handle the investigation of what events occurred in Ciudad Juarez.
Leonhart describes what happened next. “We notified the attorney general of the United States and the deputy attorney general of the United States [James Comey] of what we had learned and the events and our concerns. We told him that we had talked to customs and let them know what we had found out. Our administrator [DEA’s Karen Tandy] had also contacted the U.S. Attorney's Office [Sutton in San Antonio], and we thought the best thing we could do is get the agencies together, put an independent review team together to go down and find the facts because the person I was talking to said he had a different set of facts and didn't see it the way that we saw it.”
When asked if the case was being handled at the highest levels of government Leonhart’s replies, “absolutely.” She then goes on to place the blame for the House of Death murder spree on ICE. “Yes, it was ICE’s fault.”
Another glitch on the resume
This dubious death case is not the only question mark in Leonhart’s DEA resume. She had an association with super-snitch Andrew Chambers. This informant who reported to Leonhart directly cost taxpayers $2.2 million. During his tenure working for Leonhart, he was caught perjuring himself repeatedly.
“The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals called him (Chambers) a liar and the 8th Circuit of Court of Appeals echoed that verdict two years later.”
According to StopTheDrugWar.org Leonhart continued to use Chambers and the DEA protected him. “The DEA protected him, failing to notify prosecutors and defense attorneys about his record. At one point, DEA and the Justice Department for 17 months stalled a public defender seeking to examine the results of DEA's background check on Chambers. Even after the agency knew its snitch was rotten, it refused to stop using Chambers, and it took the intervention of then Attorney General Janet Reno to force the agency to quit using him.
When Leonhart was repeatedly questioned about Chambers regarding his credibility problems, and if the agency should stop using him, she replied, "That would be a sad day for DEA, and a sad day for anybody in the law enforcement world. He's one in a million. In my career, I'll probably never come across another Andrew."
Another Leonhart shocking statement about Chambers includes this, "The only criticism (of Chambers) I've ever heard is what defense attorneys will characterize as perjury or a lie on the stand.” She goes on to say Chambers “is an outstanding testifier." Really?
The House of Death and non-trustworthy informant, Chambers, provide a pattern for critics and directly questions Leonhart’s ability to reliably make important decisions.
The beginning of the end for the House of Death
As a result of conflicting reports about the situation by both DEA and ICE, the Joint Assessment Team was convened to review the situation. According to Gonzalez, he was blocked from gaining a copy of the report, though during his civil trial then Deputy Administrator Leonhart stated he had been informed he’d get a copy of it. Gonzalez, who retired in 2005, never saw the JAT report even though he was the DEA SAC in El Paso, and the team putting together the report questioned him directly.
Gonzalez believes, “They (ICE and DEA) needed to get their stories straight. It was clear that DEA and ICE had a strained relationship and there was a lot of finger pointing, but in the end DEA was out of the loop. We had the wisdom to deactivate Lalo when he tried to cross the U.S. border with 100 pounds of marijuana, however; ICE kept him around.”
At this point, former U.S. Attorney Pete Nunez said, “Heads should have rolled in this case.” Yet no high-ranking U.S. officials lost their jobs, nor were they prosecuted.
In April of 2004 a plea agreement was reached regarding the murders in the House of Death case. The cartel leader, Santillan pled guilty to drug trafficking while the murder charges were dropped.
Sutton’s involvement with the House of Death would not be the last high profile case he would be in charge of. He was directly involved with the Ramos and Compean case in which two Border Patrol Agents were convicted of shooting a drug dealer illegally and for their mishandling of the case they received 10-11 years of prison time. (President Bush would later commute their sentences on his last day in office).
“This case (Ramos-Compean) was a skunk. It had a terrible odor,” explains Congressman Walter B. Jones-R NC. “I always wondered why there was no investigation in this matter and why the Mexican Government had so much sway in this American case involving Border Patrol Agents.”
For Congressman Jones and a few other Congressional members the story is becoming increasingly clear, referring to the House of Death. “This conspiracy, corruption and cover-up screams for immediate Congressional investigation.”
“Wrong is wrong, and after reading more about this case it was expected that Sutton would have shut down the House of Death case after the first murder. He did not. We need to remember we are a nation of laws,” Jones finished.
The fact remains that Gonzalez’ letter guaranteed an honest agent put something on record confronting the issue of murder itself. That could not be buried as it was his memo, unlike the JAT team report, the official interagency report, which remains buried to this date. The result is a full cover up of murder with conspiracy to cover-up accessories to murder and obstruction of justice all the way up DHS and DOJ.
With the nomination of the top DEA post by President Obama, Leonhart and the circumstances surrounding the House of Death require a full investigation. If this case was indeed mishandled, Leonhart was a big player smack dab in the middle of a cover up of a murder spree in a foreign country.
Why do mainstream media and many Washington players ignore the fact the U.S. government consented to a dozen gruesome murders? In Mexico murder may be the norm, but in America the rule of law rules the day. Yet, Congress and the media continue to waste time with the college football championships and baseball stars that use steroids. America is screaming for change in Washington, perhaps this DEA appointment by Obama will shed some light on a dark period in American history.
Part two will post tomorrow.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
