What’s different on this trip is Gutierrez’ demand that President Obama bypass the uncooperative Congress entirely and use his executive power to reward foreign [...]]]> Rep Luis Gutierrez has been traveling America in recent weeks with a 20-city Amnesty Expedition, similar to the one he made in 2009, which I documented first hand (Speaker Pelosi Boards Gutierrez Amnesty Express).

What’s different on this trip is Gutierrez’ demand that President Obama bypass the uncooperative Congress entirely and use his executive power to reward foreign lawbreakers with a path to citizenship. Obama already stated on Univision in Spanish that he wouldn’t end deportations with the proverbial pen stroke, so it’s doubtful he would fork over the big amnesty enchilada. However, as miserable reelection poll numbers accumulate, Obama might be inclined to do more for his Mexican base.

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate in California is 12 percent even as of March. A massive amnesty of the sort Gutierrez envisions would transform millions of aliens into legal workers who could more easily compete with unemployed citizens for jobs.

Below is a video of Gutierrez making his pitch to an appreciative audience, possibly in Detroit, judging by the date and tag on the Tube.

Rep. Gutierrez is heading to Mexifornia this week, with appearances up and down the state. Feel free to welcome him appropriately to your community.

NEWS FLASH: American Families Tour with Rep. Luis Gutierrez Comes to California, Coalition for Humane Immigration Rights in Los Angeles, April 22, 2011

The California Table, a coalition of more than 40 organizations across the state, will host seven townhall forums this April 26 – 30, 2011 featuring Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a champion of champions on immigration reform in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The forums will highlight how our current immigration laws are impacting U.S. citizen and non-U.S. citizen families.  Testimonies from a variety of Californians will be heard.  The California tour is the largest leg of two national campaigns, the Change Takes Courage Campaign by the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM), and the American Families and Children Tour by Congressman Gutierrez.

In the attachment section below, you may print and distribute the Petition.

Below, please see the week’s schedule.  All forums are open to the public.

CALENDAR OF EVENTS

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

[Also of interest: 4/26, – Hearing in Sacramento on the TRUST Act (Ammiano), which would honor the right of local governments to opt out of the troubled “Secure” Communities immigration program; the program has raised serious safety, civil liberties, and transparency concerns. Contact Jon Rodney at 510-207-9520 for details]

**Note: Rep. Gutierrez will be present at all events below.

REDWOOD CITY. Tues. 4/26, 3:00-4:30pm.

What and where: Town hall, St. Peter’s Episcopal Church, 178 Clinton St, Redwood City.

Contact: Silvia Ramirez (650)716-7746

Sponsoring organizations: Committee de Padres Unidos; Episcopal Diocese

SAN JOSE. Tues. 4/26, 6:30-8:00pm

What and where: Town hall at Sacred Heart Church, 325 Willow St. San Jose.

Contact: Jesse Castaneda & Jazmin Segura (408)768-1161

Sponsoring organizations: SVAIR, SIREN

Testimonies and speakers: Congressman Honda; Dave Cortese, President of Co. Board of Supes; SJ Police Chief Moore, Interfaith Council members.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO, Wed, 4/27, 1:00 PM sharp.

What and where: Press Conference at SF City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Contact: Melquis Naveo, (978) 457-9875; Joe Sciarrillo, (415) 320-9963

Sponsoring organizations: SF Bay Coalition for CIR

Testimonies and speakers: Board. Pres. David Chu opens event at 1pm sharp; Supe. Campos confirmed; event will include stories of LGBT immigrant families, such as the Tan-Mercado family

Thursday, April 28, 2011

ST HELENA, CA(Napa Co.), Thurs, 4/28, 2:30 – 4:00 PM

What and where: Town hall at St. Helena Church. 1340 Tainter Street

Contact: Rosaura Segura (707)249-0716; Davin Cardenas (707)318-2818

Sponsoring organizations: St. Helena Church, Graton Day labor center

OAKLAND,Thurs 4/28, 6:00-7:30pm

What and where: Town hall at Cesar Chavez Learning Center, 2825 International Blvd., Oakland

Contact:  Polo Morales (510)529-1567

Sponsoring orgs: Faith based organizations including OCO (Oakland), CCISCO (Richmond), and others

Friday, April 29, 2011

OXNARD, Fri 4/29, 5:30-7:00pm

What and where: Town hall at Mary Star of the Sea. 463 W. Pleasant Valley Rd., Oxnard

Contact: Mayron Payes, Alicia Flores, (626) 831-8952

Sponsoring organizations: Hermandad Mexicana, Family Services

Saturday, April 30, 2011

LOS ANGELES, Sat 4/30, 11:00-12:30pm

What and where: Town hall at St. Agatha’s Church, 2646 S Mansfield Ave, LA

Contact: Jorge-Mario Cabrera, (562) 243-5559, jmcabrera@chirla.org

Sponsoring Organization: CHIRLA

Testimonies and speakers: Blanca, street vendor, mother of U.S.-born child, nabbed by LAPD; Sheena Wilson, fiancee of Jose Gutierrez a man tased by BP now in coma.

Some (many?) Muslim immigrants insist upon their alien ideology, based upon the idea of a worldwide caliphate. They [...]]]> The voters agreed by a large majority that Islamic law has no place in Oklahoma, now or ever. But the ballots were hardly counted when terrorist-affiliated Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) declared a lawsuit against the people.

Some (many?) Muslim immigrants insist upon their alien ideology, based upon the idea of a worldwide caliphate. They are not a group desirous of joining the American community — a fact which becomes more clear every day. For example, the hostility underlying the Ground Zero mosque project is typical, not an aberration.

Keep in mind that sharia views women and infidels as inherently inferior. Death is the normal punishment for apostasy, homosexuality and adultery. It is a system of primitive cruelty — amputations and stoning are common — from ancient Arabia that should not be allowed in the west in any way.

A lawsuit against a very popular initiative is no way to win friends and influence people, but CAIR seems unable to function in any other way. Polling about Muslims shows growing suspicion over time.

Oklahoma Is Sued Over Shariah Ban, Wall Street Journal, November 5, 2010

A Muslim activist in Oklahoma City filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging a voter-approved measure that bars Oklahoma state judges from considering Shariah, the Islamic religious code based on the Koran and the Prophet Mohammed’s teachings, in formulating rulings.

State Question 755, which passed Tuesday with 70% of the vote, declares “the legal precepts of other nations or cultures” off-limits to Oklahoma courts. “Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia Law,” it reads.

The suit, filed by Muneer Awad, director of the state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, asks the federal district court to block officials from certifying the referendum. Mr. Awad says the measure violates the First Amendment, which protects “free exercise” of religion and prohibits official “establishment of religion.” A hearing was set for Monday.

The complaint alleges Oklahoma has singled out Islam for “profound stigma,” consigning Muslims such as Mr. Awad “to an ineffectual position within the political community.”

The Oklahomans are merely exercising reasonable caution. When Muslim immigrants are admitted in large numbers, then brutal, misogynous sharia law is sure to follow, as Europeans have learned the hard way:

Britain has 85 sharia courts: The astonishing spread of the Islamic justice behind closed doors, Daily Mail, June 29, 2009

At least 85 Islamic sharia courts are operating in Britain, a study claimed yesterday.

The astonishing figure is 17 times higher than previously accepted.

The tribunals, working mainly from mosques, settle financial and family disputes according to religious principles. They lay down judgments which can be given full legal status if approved in national law courts.

It’s a slippery slope, particularly when authorities are politically correct weasels, afraid to enforce the law of the people.

Here’s James Woolsey on the Oklahoma case.

That’s too bad for BHO because Hispanics like [...]]]> The good news for Democrat honchos is that many Hispanics like the D-brand. The bad news for Obama boosters is Latinos are not highly motivated to actually get out and vote, despite decades of effort from liberal legislators to make voting as easy as possible (like multilingual ballots).

That’s too bad for BHO because Hispanics like him, they really like him.

The D-party has been trying to transform the millions of illegal alien Hispanics into grateful Democrat voters via amnesties, but there are still a few bugs in the system. Why would newbies feel a sense of loyalty to America when they only came for the money?

By comparison, many citizens with long family histories in America see voting as a civic duty, not an option.

The latest poll data from Pew Hispanic delivers these items of interest.

Latinos and the 2010 Elections: Strong Support for Democrats; Weak Voter Motivation, Pew Hispanic Center, October 5, 2010

In a year when support for Democratic candidates has eroded, the party’s standing among one key voting group — Latinos-appears as strong as ever. Two-thirds (65%) of Latino registered voters say they plan to support the Democratic candidate in their local congressional district, while just 22% support the Republican candidate, according to a nationwide survey of Latinos. If this pro-Democratic margin holds up on Election Day next month, it would be about as wide as in 2008, when Latinos supported Barack Obama for president over John McCain by 67% to 31%.

However, Hispanic registered voters appear to be less motivated than other voters to go to the polls. Just one-third (32%) of all Latino registered voters say they have given this year’s election “quite a lot” of thought. In contrast, half (50%) of all registered voters say the same. And when it comes to their intent to vote, half (51%) of Latino registered voters say they are absolutely certain they will vote in this year’s midterm election, while seven-in-ten (70%) of all registered voters say the same.

The survey finds that among Latino registered voters, Republicans may be more likely to turn out and vote than Democrats. Some 44% of Latino Republicans say they have given the election quite a lot of thought compared with 28% of Latino Democrats. This partisan gap is consistent with survey findings of the full population of registered voters.

When it comes to opinions of President Barack Obama, a greater share of Latino registered voters approve of his job performance than do all U.S. registered voters — 63% versus 47%. Yet when asked about the effect of his administration’s policies on Hispanics, Latino registered voters are divided. More than half (51%) say his policies have had no effect on Latinos, while one-in-four (26%) say they have been helpful to Latinos and 13% say they have been harmful.

The new survey also reveals that the Democratic Party continues to hold a large advantage in party identification among Latino registered voters. More than six-in-ten (62%) Latino registered voters say they identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party, while one-quarter (25%) say the same for the Republican Party-a Democratic advantage of 37 percentage points.

Democrats are seen as the party that has more concern for Hispanics. Nearly half (47%) of Latino registered voters say this about the Democratic Party-down from 55% in 2008, but similar to the share on this question expressed by Latinos for much of the past decade. In contrast, very few see the Republican Party as more concerned about Latinos than the Democratic Party-just 6% of all Latino registered voters and 18% of Republican Latino registered voters say this.

When Arizona enacted an unauthorized immigrant enforcement bill earlier this year, the immigration policy debate reignited across the country. Even so, the new survey shows that immigration does not rank as a top voting issue for Hispanics. Rather, they rank education, jobs and health care as their top three issues of concern for this year’s congressional campaign. Immigration ranks as the fifth most important issue for Latino registered voters and as the fourth most important issue for all Latinos.

See the whole report: Latinos and the 2010 Elections: Strong Support for Democrats; Weak Voter Motivation.

(See my earlier blog Nation of Law or Nation of Amnesty for Invading Foreigners.)

The [...]]]> Inquiring Senators want to know what’s up about their previously asked (but unanswered) question: Does Obama intend to use limited provisions of law meant to excuse individual aliens (specifically parole and deferred action) and use them instead to amnesty millions of lawbreakers?

(See my earlier blog Nation of Law or Nation of Amnesty for Invading Foreigners.)

The lack of response is indeed troubling. The Obama administration’s bad faith on this issue, demonstrated by the legal attack of the federal government on Arizona, is immense and leads concerned patriots to believe the President would do anything to advanced his agenda of flooding America with future Marxican Democrats.

Senator Charles Grassley and 11 colleagues sent a new letter recently to follow up on the earlier one in June that was ignored by the administration. The link includes the earlier letter to the President as well.

Senators again ask administration if plans are underway for large-scale de facto amnesty, Senator Grassley News Release, July 26, 2010

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

We remained concerned about potential plans for a large-scale effort to offer parole or to defer action on undocumented aliens in the United States. We realize that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances.  However, we do not believe that such actions should be used for a large population of illegal aliens or used to bypass Congress and the legislative process.

News articles report that your department has denied the charge, stating that grants of parole or deferred removal are based on the merits of individual cases.  While we have not personally been assured that plans have not been drawn up, we are interested in data that will guarantee the American people that the Administration is not using these discretionary actions in cases that are not urgent or based on humanitarian reasons.

Therefore, we seek the following information about how the department is using its authorities. Specifically, we would like answers to the following questions no later than August 16:

• How many removal actions have been deferred each year over the past 5 years, including calendar year 2010, to date?
• How many times has parole been granted each year over the past 5 years, including calendar year 2010, to date?
• Of those granted deferred action or parole in the past five years, including 2010, how many have been provided work authorizations?  In what circumstances are work authorizations not granted?
• What guidelines and procedures are in place when the department considers using its discretionary power to defer action or grant parole?  Please describe the process from the initial request to the final approval, and please provide a copy of the written policies that employees of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and Customs and Border Protection must follow.

Finally, in order to ensure that deferred action and parole are being used in a manner consistent with the law, we request to be notified in writing when the Administration defers removal action or grants parole to undocumented, deportable or inadmissible aliens.  We would further request a summary of the case and the rationale for using the discretionary action.  In that vein, we would like a summary (including demographic background) of the cases that so far have been approved in calendar year 2010.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to hearing from you.

The headline of the new Gallup poll emphasized [...]]]> There’s been a substantial change in how Americans see the Democratic Party in the two years since they have been running the legislative and executive branches of government. Liberal priorities have been on clear display with Obama and his Chicago cronies in charge, and the people have noticed.

The headline of the new Gallup poll emphasized that nearly half were critical of the extreme leftward nature of the party (“too liberal”), but what’s more interesting is how rapidly that number has shot upward, from 39 to 49 percent in just two years.

Near-Record 49% Say Democratic Party “Too Liberal”, Gallup, Inc, June 14, 2010

PRINCETON, NJ — In the past two years, Americans have become increasingly likely to describe the Democratic Party’s views as “too liberal” (49%), and less likely to say its views are “about right” (38%). Americans’ views of the Republican Party, on the other hand, have moderated slightly, with a dip in the percentage saying the GOP is too conservative from 43% last year to 40% today, and an increase in the percentage saying it is about right, from 34% to 41%.

Also fascinating is how the proportion of people who regard the Democrats as “about right” went from 50 percent to 38 percent in the same two-year period.

Gallup’s identical questions about the Republicans showed little change in opinion (see the link).

Interestingly, a Rasmussen poll from last week showed more inclusive disgust: 65% Say Country Better Off If Most in Congress Defeated This November.
.

Washington Journal, June 7

Andrew McCarthy talked about his book, The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America, and he responded to telephone calls and electronic communications. Mr. [...]]]> Andrew McCarthy appeared on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal Monday morning for a discussion of his recently published book The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.

Washington Journal, June 7

Andrew McCarthy talked about his book, The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America, and he responded to telephone calls and electronic communications. Mr. McCarthy believes the real threat to the U.S. is the forces of Islam. He says the forces have collaborated with the American left to undermine U.S. national security and constitutional democracy.

McCarthy is a former New York prosecutor who handled the terrorism case of the blind sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, an experience which awakened him to the danger of hostile Islam, documented in his previous book, Willful Blindness.

Santa Cruz drug users hooked on Mexican-produced black tar heroin, San Jose Mercury, May 21, 2010 Black tar heroin grown and processed in the southern mountains of Mexico travels north [...]]]> Santa Cruz, California, used to be a laid-back beach community where nothing much happened, in a good way. Now it’s infested with Mexican gangsters and bad drugs.

Santa Cruz drug users hooked on Mexican-produced black tar heroin, San Jose Mercury, May 21, 2010
Black tar heroin grown and processed in the southern mountains of Mexico travels north up highways, crosses borders and finds its way to Santa Cruz County, where it’s sold for $10 a hit.

Mexican and Salvadoran gangs control some of the drug trade, but dealers also are tight-knit Mexican families or even addicts.

Drug users — from high school- and college-age kids to people in their 50s — get their heroin fix at small camps tucked behind trees along the railroad tracks in Santa Cruz’s Harvey West neighborhood or from drug houses scattered across the county.

Santa Cruz is one of the many stupid communities which have adopted sanctuary policies, thereby welcoming foreign criminals and providing them with ideal places to ply their trades.

Liberals can get seriously out of control in sanctuary cities. San Francisco famously spent piles of money coddling illegal Honduran crack dealers who had fake IDs showing them to be juveniles.

Anyway, Santa Cruz was all peace and love toward their local illegal aliens until violent drug crime went off the charts. Finally they had to call in the federal immigration agencies to clean up the mess, but old attitudes persist.

Santa Cruz police to partner with immigration officials to fight gang violence, San Jose Mercury, May 5, 2010

Besieged by unsolved gang violence, Santa Cruz police turned to federal immigration agents for help this week.

Beginning Tuesday, a team of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are working with the Police Department to investigate gang crime in the city, Santa Cruz Police Chief Howard Skerry announced Wednesday.

“We’ve reached a point where I, as chief, will call in every available resource,” Skerry said. “The whole focus of this is to find out who committed these crimes and bring them to justice.” Carl Reimer, 19, died April 17 after being shot three times by suspected gang members in a Westside park area. No arrests have been made.

There also are outstanding suspects in three other gang-related homicides in the city dating back to October.

“I’m looking to solve crime, so they’re coming in and they’re going to help me,” Skerry said.

The effort is part of Operation Community Shield, an ongoing ICE effort to partner with local police agencies to address gang issues. […]

Santa Cruz city leaders said Wednesday they were pleased the Police Department is getting outside help in dealing with gang violence, but expressed reservations about the perception of ICE agents working in the city.

“We need to do everything we can to stop the gang violence while at the same time maintaining the community’s trust and open communication with our police department and law enforcement agencies so part of a solution has to be – must be – that there be information and education to the public,” Councilman Tony Madrigal said, adding people need to be told immigration authorities are coming to Santa Cruz for a specific purpose. “Any cooperation that happens cannot and should not whittle down the trust and the open communication that has taken so long to establish and build and grow.”

Santa Cruz is a “sanctuary city,” a label the City Council adopted in 1982 after Immigration and Naturalization Services authorities, the precursor to ICE, conducted raids in the Beach Flats neighborhood and pulled kids out of class at Bay View Elementary School, according to Mayor Mike Rotkin.

At the time, becoming a sanctuary city was as much an effort to protect residents as it was to assist police officers, who worried that actions by federal agents eroded the community’s trust in other law enforcement, including local police, Rotkin said.

The mayor was supportive of the new police-ICE partnership.

“I don’t think the plan is for ICE to come in here and do sweeps,” he said.

Too bad.