Obama : "We didn’t raise the Statue of Liberty with its back to the world; we raised it with its light to the world. Whether your ancestors came here on the Mayflower or a slave ship; whether they signed in at Ellis Island or they crossed the Rio Grande -- we are one people"

.
Great Oratory, Great Politician, Great Statesman, Great Man - Obama is THE Political Phenomenon of our time, and as he says battles are not won in a second and without effort.


And by the way, Oratory is a form of Art, Obama is an artist or has Great Speechwriters.




POLITICO.COM
Obama: Immigration reform now
By POLITICO STAFF
April 30, 2011


Obama: Immigration reform now


Some excerpts :

President Obama delivered the commencement address at Miami Dade College Friday evening. He used the speech to call for comprehensive immigration reform, saying “it makes no sense to expel talented young people from our country.”

The full immigration section of his remarks:

“I know that several young people here have recently identified themselves as undocumented. Some were brought here as young children, and discovered the truth only as adults. And they’ve put their futures on the line in hopes it will spur the rest of us to live up to our most cherished values.

..............

“Changing our laws means doing the hard work of changing minds and changing votes, one by one. And I am convinced we can change the laws, because we should all be able to agree that it makes no sense to expel talented young people from our country. They grew up as Americans. They pledge allegiance to our flag. And if they are trying to serve in our military or earn a degree, they are contributing to our future -- and we welcome those contributions. (Applause.)

“We didn’t raise the Statue of Liberty with its back to the world; we raised it with its light to the world. (Applause.) Whether your ancestors came here on the Mayflower or a slave ship; whether they signed in at Ellis Island or they crossed the Rio Grande -- we are one people. We need one another. Our patriotism is not rooted in ethnicity, but in a shared belief of the enduring and permanent promise of this country. (Applause.)

“That’s the promise redeemed by your graduation today. That’s the promise that drew so many of you to this college and your parents to this country. And that’s the promise that drew my own father here.”

.

VIDEO, Keith Olbermann : Arizona is prey to Insanity, most Unamerican and anti-American State, asking certificate of Circumcission of Presidents. Dismantle and sell Arizona to neighboring States or to the Chinese

.
uploaded by MiniRtist on Apr 28, 2011

FOK News Channel - A Modest Proposal About Arizona - April 28, 2011

The Beautiful Great and Wonderful Royal Wedding hides the supreme Fiasco, Failure and Irrationality of British Foreign Policy - Dragged by Narcissistic Nicholas Sarkozy into a Quagmire

.

In Ancient Times before Jesus of Nazareth you conquered a nation, burned the cities, stole the treasures, and enslaved the people, after killing all dangerous warriors.

War was an excellent business and very profitable. That was observed by Miccolo Machiavelli, Michel de Montaigne and other thinkers of the 15xx European renaissance.

But the same political philosophers observed that Christianity had made war less desirable and profitable. Because the Gospels of Jesus preached peace, being tame and meek, and not doing harm to others.

So the Christian or Catholic church had severely limited war. There were many days in the middle ages when war was totally forbidden by the Pope and the religious authorities under very grave penalties of excommunication and the Sacred German Emperors and all kings feared the Pope and the Clergy.

So Niccolo Machiavelli advised to be wise in matters of war, prudence was better than boldness and audacity, and the Prince that went to war needed very good calculations of the risks and grave dangers, like annoying the Pope, the clergy, or those people that read the Gospels and took them seriously.

The Chinese scholar and man of wisdom Sun-Tzu had warned five centuries before Christ against prolonged war and imprudent wars. Wars that lasted a lot of time did a lot of harm to both parties.

Come to the Twenty Fist Century, a Narcissist in France drags nice people to War in Libya and paints this adventure as very easy. The Presidents and Prime Ministers fall in this trap of foolishness.

This Libyan war is a WAR OF COWARDICE AND BASTARDY, a war totally lacking in honor, bravery, risk, danger, courage, valor, gallantry.

You just shoot Tomahawk cruise missiles from a safe distance of 100 miles or operate Drones ( robot airplanes ) from a safe chair in the Hancock Air Base near Syracuse, New York. While the airplane flies you can read playboy and drink Coca Cola.

These presidents and prime ministers ignore the fact that they now own Libya and are responsible for the Civil War, for the dead, the maimed, the people in crutches and wheelchairs, the orphans, the widows, the poverty and destitution in Libya.

They are the owners of all future political conflicts and deaths in Libya. And it is highly possible that the western dreams of cheap oil from Libya are not going to take form.

Another chapter in the Saga of the DeWesternization and DeWhitenization of the Whole World.

Vicente Duque

.

Judge Bea upheld the injunction against the provisions of SB 1070 making illegal presence a state crime and making it a state crime for someone who is here illegally to work. There's no reason to believe that a broader 9th Circuit panel or the Supreme Court will see it differently

.

Arizona Republic says that "SB 1070 is toast" and the dissent of Judge Bea does not help :

The heart of SB 1070 was to make illegal immigration a state crime, adjudicated in state courts and punished in state penal institutions. Judge Bea said no can do.




Arizona Republic
Don't read a lot into Gov. Brewer's recent shifts
by Robert Robb, columnist
April 23, 2011


Don't read a lot into Gov. Brewer's recent shifts


Some comments :

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision upholding the injunction against several key provisions of Senate Bill 1070, Arizona's contentious immigration law, hasn't received the careful consideration it deserves.

Brewer and Attorney General Tom Horne airily dismissed the decision as what you would expect from 9th Circuit liberals and pointed to the dissent by Judge Carlos Bea.

I agree that the dissent is the most important part of the decision. And it says that SB 1070 is toast.

......................

Bea did say that the most controversial part of SB 1070, the provision requiring local law enforcement to follow up on reasonable suspicion of illegal status, wasn't preempted by federal law. I think he's right about that.

Bea, however, went on to say that all local law-enforcement officials could do about it was notify the feds. What the feds did after that was entirely up to them.

So, even under Bea's dissent, SB 1070 would be a hollow shell. There's no reason to believe that a broader 9th Circuit panel or the Supreme Court will see it differently.

.

Bloomberg : "Why Obama Gets Four More Years in White House: Ralph Nader" - Obama won’t join Jimmy Carter to be the second Democrat in 120 years to lose a second term - Five things are playing in Obama’s favor

.

Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump and others might as well be on the Democratic National Committee payroll - Because their extremism will turn the moderates off, independents and centrists will feel repugnance because of their bigoty and racism.

Bloomberg
Why Obama Gets Four More Years in White House: Ralph Nader
By Ralph Nader
April 27, 2011


Why Obama Gets Four More Years in White House: Ralph Nader


Some excerpts :

First, the Republicans -- driven by their most conservative members in Congress -- will face a primary with many candidates who will advance harsh ideological positions. Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump and others might as well be on the Democratic National Committee payroll. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s reverse Robin Hood plan to cut more than $6 trillion in spending over a decade will provide the outrage, stoked by a sitting president possessed of verbal discipline.

Second, the Republican governors’ attacks on unions are turning off the swing voters and Reagan Democrats in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Imagine the voter reaction if millions of workers lose their right to collective bargaining, and the impact that cuts in benefits and wages will have on their lives.

..............

By 2014, Obamacare will deliver some 30 million subsidized customers to health-insurance companies. The auto industry is forever grateful for its bailout. Obama hasn’t moved on corporate-tax reform, tax shelters for the wealthy, or the preferential capital-gains tax treatment on the 20 percent service fees of hedge fund managers. Don’t forget last December when Obama agreed to extended tax cuts for the rich while the budget deficit gets larger.

The military-industrial complex about which President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his farewell address 50 years ago, is still uncontrollable, leading departing Defense Secretary Robert Gates to express serious concerns. Obama has even surprised George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and his cohort of neocons, who can scarcely believe how militarily aggressive Obama has been on just about every move that liberals used to call impeachable offenses by former President George W. Bush.

..............

Fifth, since the Republicans have little to offer by way of creating jobs, Obama need only show improvement in macroeconomic indicators, as Ronald Reagan did in 1983-1984, and proceed to showcase all the tax breaks he has signed into law for big and small businesses. Poor Americans who continue to bear the brunt of the recession are hardly going to vote Republican. It will be easy for Obama, with his oratorical skills, to paint the Republican-controlled House of Representatives as obstructionist, especially as he develops an economic plan for his second term.

.................

Obama is averse to conflict with corporate power and disarmingly expedient in compromising with Republicans, leaving the latter to argue largely among themselves. The political duopoly lets the tactical Obama use the Bully Pulpit to his political advantage, even if his principles perish. Obama can look forward to four more years in 2012.

.

VIDEO, Ed Schultz talks with retired U. S. Army Colonel and former chief of staff to United States Secretary of State Colin Powell - From super Hawk to opposing tortures, abuse of Military Might, Jingoism and Militarism

.
"America Can No Longer Control The World Through Military Might" 


Uploaded by MoxNewsDotCom on Apr 27, 2011


April 26, 2011 MSNBC The ED Show

Lawrence B. "Larry" Wilkerson ( born 1945 ) is a visiting professor at the College of William & Mary, teaching courses on U.S. national security. He is a Professorial Lecturer in the Honors Program at the George Washington University, teaching a course named "National Security Decision Making." He and his wife Barbara have two children. His son is an Air Force navigator while his daughter was in the Army but has since returned to civilian life.

"America Can No Longer Control The World Through Military Might"

Latino Lawmakers Sue Texas Governor Rick Perry For Attempting To Undercut Latino Vote - The map being debated in the House Redistricting Committee is simply designed to elect a strong majority of Republicans and adds only one new Latino district in the Corpus Christi area

.

Republican gerrymandering in Texas : the creation of only one new Latino district in a state where Latinos are driving population growth and will soon be the majority. This "Republican Conspiracy" tries to avoid Texas becoming a Blue ( Democrat ) state, and keep it under Republican Yoke.

Due to fears, Latinos were strongly undercounted in Texas, specially in the border with Mexico areas. There have been big "progroms" to evict Latinos in the past from Texas and the USA. And millions have been evicted, in 1929, 1930 and under President Eisenhower.

Think Progress
Latino Lawmakers Sue Texas Governor Rick Perry For Attempting To Undercut Latino Vote
By Andrea Nill
April 19, 2011


Latino Lawmakers Sue Texas Governor Rick Perry For Attempting To Undercut Latino Vote


Some excerpts :

Earlier this year, the U.S. Census Bureau released figures that support predications that Latinos will soon outnumber whites in Texas. Latinos already make up 38 percent of the state’s population and two-thirds of the state’s 4.3 million population increase over the last ten years. The Texas State Data Center projects that Latinos will become the majority in the state over the next decade.

The dramatic demographic transformation has sparked a redistricting war in Texas that has culminated in a lawsuit brought against Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) and the state of Texas filed on behalf of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus (MALC). The Latino lawmakers allege that current redistricting activities are based on a flawed and discriminatory undercount of the Latino population. Courthouse News reports:

The Caucus says Texas’ unfair 2011 redistricting plan was based on faulty 2010 Census data that “severely undercounts Latinos,” especially in poor areas along the Texas-Mexican border: “Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, Webb and El Paso Counties, as well as urban areas in Dallas and Houston.” It says the “2010 Census process and procedures resulted in substantial omissions in Latino population.”

It claims that Census Bureau was aware that “people in poor urban communities are harder to count, as are people who live in poor suburban unincorporated subdivisions primarily located along the Texas-Mexican border and often referred to as ‘colonias.’” [...] The Caucus claims that “after promoting and advertising and educating the community in these counties of the use of the ‘mail-out, mail-in’ counting strategy the Census Bureau announced on the day the Census was to commence that this strategy would not be employed for the ‘colonias.’” As a result, Latinos along the state’s border were undercounted by 4 to 8 percent, the Caucus claims.

MALC’s lawsuit was reportedly filed just as Hidalgo county officials were preparing their own litigation against the U.S. Census Bureau. Hidalgo County Judge Ramon Garcia claims that the final county census tally was short by as many as 250,000 people, which could result in $300 million to $400 million in lost federal funding for education, health care and infrastructure.

Ultimately, a Census undercount may not be the only legal issue at play. State Rep. Robert Alonzo (D) reminds the Republican-controlled state that “The reason for us being here is to remind them that if they don’t do it the right way now, it’s going to be done the right way in courts.” The Voting Rights Act of 1965 requires Texas, along with eight other southern states with a history of voter discrimination, to obtain federal approval of any new voter district map.

.

USA debt is 60% of GDP - Japan's debt is over 200% of GDP, Britain's, after World War II, was over 250%, and Britain went on to enjoy a postwar recovery. - Obama should talk of Jobs and Recovery, not budget reduction

.

By Robert Kuttner, he is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos. His latest book is A Presidency in Peril.

Huffington Post
A Double Dip Recession for 2012?
By Robert Kuttner
April 24, 2011


A Double Dip Recession for 2012?


Some excerpts :

But wait, isn't the deficit a real problem? Yes, and no. Eventually, deficits at the 2011 level are not sustainable. However, the current accumulated debt held by the public of about 60 percent of GDP is not dire.

We could have two or three years of bigger deficits, very major public investment, let the debt ratio peak at 100% of GDP; and then stronger recovery, lower unemployment, and higher taxes on the wealthy would bring the debt ratio slowly down, as occurred after WW II.

Japan's debt ratio, for comparative purposes, is over 200 % of GDP -- and Japan is increasing government outlay to repair the damage of the earthquake and tsunami. Britain's, after World War II, was over 250 percent, and Britain went on to enjoy a postwar recovery.

Why can't we have massive public reparation with war or natural disaster? Because politicians lack the vision and nerve.

Austerity will only slow down the recovery. The idea that a steeper path to deficit reduction will somehow restore business confidence and thus more than offset the hit to purchasing power is just blarney. And with both parties committed to some version of austerity, we could easily have the worst of both worlds -- increasing inflation coupled with persistent stagnation.

However much the Republicans are at fault--for creating the financial collapse, blocking a stronger stimulus in 2009, and looting the Treasury with tax cuts for the rich, causing much of the deficit problem in the first place -- an incumbent president tends to take the blame for hard economic times. Obama's talk of having a kinder, gentler brand of deficit reduction is no match for rising fuel and food prices and persistent worries about basic economic security.

Can the president shift to a rhetoric and policy that emphasizes the need for more jobs and a stronger recovery, and soon? Let's hope so. There is nothing like an election hanging to concentrate a politician's mind.

.

Have you noticed that the videos of YouTube.com are slowly becoming unavailable to post in our pages ?? - The road to the Nerdy Nirvana : Are we sane because we do not use marihuana, cocaine, heroine and crystal meth ??, or maybe we are becoming nerds, freaks and fools in other categories ??

.
Dangerous categories not related to Drugs : harassers, accumulators, gamblers, mad in love, political bigots, prejudice victims, internet geeks, web freaks, monothematics, etc... ?


I have many doubts about myself, but I try to be a ( little ) force for Good and Peace.


This topic of categories and interests is very important - Sometimes I feel that I enter too many categories : Immigration, the Budget, Electoral Predictions for 2012, International Wars in the Middle East, the madness of Drones ?? ... too many interests ??


I abandoned a site that I had on Foreign Policy because there were too few visitors, but I can not renounce the powerful drug of Foreign Policy ( like a marihuana, cocaine, heroine, meth ).


Being a Forum Junk may be better than being a Religious Cultist, a moonie, and much better than spending hours listening to Fox News ...


There is an at home test for pregnancy, but there is not one to tell if we are mad, crazy, or at least aggressive and mean.


And by the way, Have you noticed that the videos of YouTube.com are slowly becoming unavailable to post in our pages ?? - I love videos because I love the passion, irony and sarcasm of humans and their voices, the written page does not show these emotions.


Humorists like Bill Maher, Rick Horowitz, Old Fart Rants, and wonderful people like Keith Olbermann and the guys of MSNBC : They are wonderful, but only on video.


And Cretins like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, they make me laugh but only in the close human personality of a video.




Cheers !




Vicente

"Todd Landfried, a spokesperson for Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform, a group of more than 250 businesses in the state, says companies are realizing that SB 1070 drove away consumers and taxpayers, made it harder to find labor, and gave Arizona a bad reputation as a place to do business".

.

"The dirt and filth that does not kill you, makes you stronger"

New America Media,
News Report

One Year After SB 1070, Arizona's Immigrant Networks Are Stronger
By Valeria Fernández
April 22, 2011


One Year After SB 1070, Arizona's Immigrant Networks Are Stronger


Some excerpts ;

"There's a general concensus that [passing anti-immigrant legislation] has been a bad strategy for Arizona," Landfried says.

A study released this past March by the Center for American Progress (CAP), a think tank in Washington, D.C., contrasts the economic effects of massive deportation with the effects of legalization of Arizona’s estimated half a million undocumented immigrants.

An enforcement-only approach could lead to a loss of 17.2 percent of total employment in the state and shrink the state's economy by $48.8 billion, according to the report. Legalizing undocumented immigrants in the state, meanwhile, could increase employment by close to 8 percent and increase state tax revenues by $1.68 billion.

As of last November, a boycott against the state had cost convention centers $141 million in cancellations, according to another CAP study.

Alfredo Gutierrez, a former Democratic state senator and editor of the bilingual online newspaper La Frontera Times in Phoenix, says that businesses turned against SB 1070 in the wake of the boycott and the efforts by pro-immigrant groups to exert political pressure, through civl disobedience demonstrations and behind the scenes.

The pro-immigrant movement in Arizona "is maturing politically—it was being pushed to the brink,” Gutierrez says.

.

AntiWar.com : Ray McGovern : "News Flash: Iraq War Was About Oil" - Very prominent people of the Bush Administration tell the story that the war was motivated by the desire to acquire Cheap Oil for American and British Corporations

.

Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves - The assault on Iraq was prepared many months before September 11 and Big Oil Corporations had a lot to do with the push for Petroleum

AntiWar.com
News Flash: Iraq War Was About Oil
by Ray McGovern
April 23, 2011


News Flash: Iraq War Was About Oil


Some excerpts :

Oil researcher Greg Muttitt’s new book Fuel on Fire: Oil and Politics in Occupied Iraq presents that evidence, since Muttitt had better luck than his American counterparts in getting responses to his Freedom of Information requests.

After a five-year struggle, he obtained more than 1,000 official documents which — how to say this — do not reflect well on the peerage, the captains of the oil industry, and the government of Tony Blair.

On April 19, the British Independent published a major story about these disclosures, which America’s Fawning Corporate Media has avoided like the plague.

.................

They show then-British Trade Minister, Lady Symons, agreeing that British oil companies must not lose out in competing for Iraqi oil, particularly "if the U.K. had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the U.S. government throughout the crisis."

.............

As early as May 2003, (in the heady days of "Mission Accomplished"), then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz nonchalantly responded to a question about why Bush attacked Iraq, but not North Korea, by noting that Iraq "floats on a sea of oil."

At that early stage, Wolfowitz apparently still thought the Iraq war would be the "cakewalk" predicted by his neoconservative ally Kenneth Adelman. With the war supposedly won – and with Americans famously tolerant of the behavior of winners – Wolfowitz might have thought some candor wouldn’t raise many eyebrows.

At that point, the Bush team still harbored hope that convicted felon/conman extraordinaire Ahmed Chalabi could be put in power in Baghdad, open the door to Western oil companies, and — not incidentally — recognize Israel.

Wolfowitz, Adelman, and the neoconservative crowd would have been wiser to temper their hubris with a smidgeon of common sense. The notion that Chalabi had, or could garner, a significant following in Iraq was a pipe dream.

The State Department conducted a poll of Iraqis in 2003, finding Chalabi to be the only listed political leader whose unfavorable ratings exceeded his favorable ones. And small wonder. Chalabi and his wealthy family had left Iraq in 1956.

..............

Despite Chalabi’s lack of Iraqi roots, the neoconservative movers and shakers in Washington and Baghdad still helped get him appointed in 2005 as Deputy Prime Minister and Chair of the Iraq Energy Council, which directed Iraqi oil policy. Chalabi was also in and out as acting Oil Minister.

Insiders Reveal Oil Role

Bush’s first Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, who was fired in late 2002 after disagreeing with Bush on tax cuts and Iraq, was one of the first insiders to detail the administration’s Iraqi oil obsession, tracing it back to the days after Bush’s inauguration as Bush’s advisers planned how to divvy up Iraq’s oil wealth.

O’Neill told author Ron Suskind for his 2004 book, The Price of Loyalty, that Bush’s first National Security Council meeting just days into his presidency included a discussion of invading Iraq. O’Neill said even at that early date, the message from Bush was "find a way to do this."

Subsequent disclosures have corroborated O’Neill’s account about the importance of oil in Bush’s calculation. Though Freedom of Information requests in the United States have been nowhere near as successful as those in London, one did hit pay dirt.

A FOIA lawsuit forced the Commerce Department to fork over some documents of Cheney’s Energy Task Force documents from March 2001, including a map of Iraqi oilfield, pipelines, refineries, terminals, and potential areas for exploration.

There also was a Pentagon chart titled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," and one chart detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects.

................

As the years wore on and the Bush administration struggled to control the violent resistance to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, other prominent Americans began acknowledging the obvious importance of oil in the U.S. calculation for war.

Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan in his 2007 book The Age of Turbulence wrote: "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

In a talk at Stanford on Oct. 13, 2007, former CENTCOM commander Gen. John Abizaid seconded Greenspan. "Of course it [Iraq] is all about oil," Abizaid said.

.................

–"Kick Their Ass and Take Their Gas!" (prominent placard held by local Texans counter-demonstrating against supporters of Cindy Sheehan, August 2005);

–"We go to war for oil. It’s a good reason to go to war." (Ann Coulter, speech at Carnegie Institute, Washington, DC, April 21, 2011).

.

Texas : The population of the Republican-friendly Dallas suburb of Collin County (782,341) is about the same as the Democratic-friendly, heavily-Hispanic El Paso County (800,647). But voter turnout last year was nearly twice as high in Collin County than in El Paso, 156,668 to 88,505

.

There is a Great Beautiful Potential in Hispanics to vote for Obama 2012 - But it is not easy to motivate them, if no efforts are made Obama can lose several states that he won in 2008.

Very Hard and Constant Relentless Work registering, canvassing and motivating Latinos would be useful for reelecting President Obama.

In a Dream Obama Universe or Obamaverse Arizona, Texas and Missouri could vote for Obama, but that is extremely difficult.

National Journal
Hispanic Growth Ahead of Political Participation
By Josh Kraushaar
April 15, 2011 | 8:11 AM


Hispanic Growth Ahead of Political Participation


Some excerpts :

It's a similar situation in Arizona, where Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) found himself in a surprisingly close contest last year, even though his district is majority-Hispanic and solidly Democratic. But voter participation there was just under 160,000 - one of the lowest totals in any House district in the country - meaning a relatively small proportion of Latinos actually showed up at the polls.

It's something to consider as we look at the presidential battlegrounds, where President Obama is counting on significant Hispanic turnout and support to contest pivotal states like Florida, Nevada, Colorado and even Arizona. Democrats have been more effective at registering Hispanic voters in Nevada, but less so in Arizona and Texas where turnout has been anemic in many of the heavily-Hispanic seats.

.

Stephen Walt : "Great powers could be a lot more careful about where and when they used military power to try to determine who gets to run some foreign country. But that's an option that U.S. leaders seem to have forgotten"

.

Here it is, once again, my favorite writer in Foreign Policy Mag : Professor Stephen M. Walt always announces how things are going to deteriorate because of imprudence and rashness of the "Hawks" and the "Harpies" ( Aggressive Ladies ) in Washington.

I like people that tell the future with perfect precission, and I dislike the "pundits" that always tell a lot of blather that never happens.

Foreign Policy Magazine
The intervention paradox
By Stephen M. Walt
Wednesday, April 20, 2011


The intervention paradox


Some excerpts :

This situation is a textbook illustration of what one might call the Intervention Paradox. Because there are no vital strategic interests at stake in the Libyan situation, outside leaders are reluctant to do whatever it takes to resolve the situation quickly. You don't hear Obama, Sarkozy, or Cameron declaring that they are going to call up reserves, redeploy forces from other commitments, or launch a direct invasion of Libya itself. They know that that mission isn't worth it, and that their own populations would quickly question the wisdom of such a massive operation.

Instead, intervening powers try to use as little force as possible, and seek to minimize their own casualties above all. After all, when there are no vital interests at stake, it is much harder to justify the loss of one's own soldiers. So they rely on airpower, not boots on the ground. They'll send advisors and weapons, but not their own troops. But because the rebel army is a ramshackle operation, and because there are real limits to what NATO can achieve with airpower alone, this minimalist approach is more likely to produce a costly stalemate in which more Libyans die. Even if it eventually succeeds, going in small prolongs the fighting and does more damage to the people we are supposedly helping.

The other option, of course, is to use overwhelming force from the very beginning. Qaddafi's loyal forces might be effective against a poorly-trained rebel army, but they would be no match for a sizeable NATO force. But this isn't really the answer either, even if we had such forces readily available (and remember, the United States is already bogged down in other places). For one thing, doing it this way is a lot more expensive, and you're likely to lose some of your own people along the way. And once you've ousted the regime you own the country, and trying to put a society like Libya back together again would not be easy or cheap (see under: Iraq, Afghanistan). Given the divisions that are already apparent among the rebels themselves, and the absence of well-functioning social and political institutions, a post-Qaddafi Libya is likely to be a real headache. And there's always the risk that an insurgency will spring up, further inflating the costs.

Hence the paradox: if you go in light you get a protracted stalemate; if you go in big you end up with a costly quagmire. Under these circumstances you can understand why the intervening powers are tiptoeing their way in, but as noted above, that merely increases the danger that the civil war drags on.

There is a third option, however: great powers could be a lot more careful about where and when they used military power to try to determine who gets to run some foreign country. But that's an option that U.S. leaders seem to have forgotten.

.

USA vs Arizona SB 1070 : Judge Paez strikes at the heart of Arizona's Kobachian weakness by pointing out that which a Professor of Constitutional Law should be aware, rulings of the Supreme Court. - Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

.

This is the best site to study these intricate matters : beautiful clarity to illuminate what is obscure, complex, puzzling and entangled. This guy should be a superb teacher of law.

Ideas, Observations, & Mental Machinations
USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART THREE
April 15, 2011


USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART THREE


Some excerpts :

Judge Paez's opening volley on §3 refutes any presumption against preemption because enforcing immigration laws is not an area traditionally occupied by the States. That means the presumption safeguarding the historic police powers of the States does not apply.

Judge Paez next engages in statutory interpretation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1304 and 1306. Paez writes: "These sections create a comprehensive scheme for immigrant registration, including penalties for failure to carry one’s registration document at all times, 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e), and penalties for willful failure to register, failure to notify change of address, fraudulent statements, and counterfeiting. 8 U.S.C. § 1306 (a)-(d). These provisions include no mention of state participation in the registration scheme. By contrast, Congress provided very specific directions for state participation in 8 U.S.C. § 1357, demonstrating that it knew how to ask for help where it wanted help; it did not do so in the registration scheme."

Dismantling the intellectual sleight of hand apparently devised by SB 1070's brain trust, Kris Kobach, Judge Paez exposes the weakness of Arizona's legal argument.

Arizona was arguing that §3 was not preempted because Congress had invited the participation of the States in the general scheme of immigration enforcement.

Paez writes "Congress has expressly indicated how and under what conditions States should help the federal government in immigration regulation. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1621-25, 1324a(h)(2).

..................

Paez says "S.B. 1070 Section 3 plainly stands in opposition to the Supreme Court’s direction: “where the federal government, in the exercise of its superior authority in this field, has enacted a complete scheme of regulation and has therein provided a standard for the registration of aliens, states cannot, inconsistently with the purpose of Congress, conflict or interfere with, curtail or complement, the federal law, or enforce additional or auxiliary regulations.” Hines, 312 U.S. at 66-67.

In Hines, the Court considered the preemptive effect of a precursor to the INA, but the Court’s language speaks in general terms about “a complete scheme of regulation,” — as to registration, documentation, and possession of proof thereof — which the INA certainly contains. Section 3’s state punishment for federal registration violations fits within the Supreme Court’s very broad description of proscribed state action in this area—which includes “complementing” and “enforcing additional or auxiliary regulations."

Paez next takes Arizona to school by citing cases where preemption does or does not apply and Paez is kind enough to teach Arizona why the results are reached.

.

Electoral College 4 Presidential Election November 2012 : Sure Democrats 182, Likely Dems 14, Lean Dem 51 : Total 247, but there are 111 tossups, and Obama only needs 270 - See Electoral Maps with Colors and Strategies - Larry Sabato's Maps

.
Larry Sabato has an electoral college map -- the first for 2012! - Notice that Arizona, Texas, Georgia and Missouri are not super red ( super Republican ) but only light red ( Likely Republican or leans Republican for MO ).


Huffington Post
Here Is Your First Electoral College Projection Map Of 2012, So Go Nuts, Nerds!
By Jason Linkins
April 21, 2011


Here Is Your First Electoral College Projection Map Of 2012, So Go Nuts, Nerds!


Some excerpts :

With 18 months to go until November 2012, there is exactly one use for a current projection of the 2012 Electoral College results. This is merely a baseline from which we can judge more reliable projections made closer to the election. Where did we start-before we knew the identity of the Republican nominee for president, the state of the economy in fall 2012 and many other critical facts?

I promise you, his urgings will be in vain! But okay, here's the shocking baseline:

If you'll notice, the "battlegrounds" are Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. Savvy election watchers will recognize most of these states as being "where the battleground always is anyway, so, whatever."

For fun, let's review what happens in the event of a 269-269 tie or if the No Labels Bipartisan Robot secures enough votes to prevent anyone from taking 270 votes, in accordance with the 12th Amendment to the Constitution.

Should this happen -- and should no "faithless electors" emerge to switch a vote -- it would fall to the House of Representatives to determine the winner of the presidential race. But there's a twist! Each state's delegation to the House would have to vote "en bloc" -- which means each state gets a single vote. That, of course, means that in theory, this could get hung in a 25-25 tie. The smart decision would have been to allow the District of Columbia to have a vote as well, but guess what? D.C. always gets screwed. And so the balloting would continue on and on until it's resolved. (A quorum of two-thirds of all the state delegations would be necessary for these activities to take place.)

.

HuffPost : Doug Bandow : U.S. involvement in Libya is simply stupid. The stakes are minimal, the objectives are confused, the benefits are negligible, the resources are inadequate, the costs are excessive, and the consequences are dangerous

.
Huffington Post
Libya: Resisting the Siren Call of Creeping Intervention
By Doug Bandow
Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute
April 21, 2011


Libya: Resisting the Siren Call of Creeping Intervention


Some excerpts :

To avoid another Kosovo, Michael Hirsh of the National Journal advocated that President Barack Obama toss aside his earlier promise and "consider ground troops." Anthony Cordesman of CSIS proposed an even more dramatic escalation, though without ground forces.

Wrote Cordesman: "France, Britain, the U.S. and other participating members of the Coalition need to shift to the kind of bombing campaign that targets and hunts down Qaddafi's military and security forces in their bases and as they move -- as long before they engage rebel forces as possible." Moreover, added Cordesman, "Hard, and sometimes brutal, choices need to be made between limited civilian casualties and collateral damage during the decisive use of force and an open-ended war of attrition."

Hirsh's and Cordesman's advice makes a certain sense -- but only if there is no alternative to war in Libya. To his credit, Vice President Joseph Biden dismissed the argument that only America can resolve the Libyan crisis: "it is bizarre to suggest that NATO and the rest of the world lacks the capability to deal with Libya -- it does not." The problem, he said, was will, not capacity.

There is an even more important point. The stakes do not warrant escalation. The vice president pointed to America's strategic concerns elsewhere, including next door in Egypt. Libya barely registers. Nothing there warrants Washington's involvement.

Indeed, U.S. involvement in this conflict is simply stupid. The stakes are minimal, the objectives are confused, the benefits are negligible, the resources are inadequate, the costs are excessive, and the consequences are dangerous. A month ago the president was right to reject the use of ground forces. Today he should end U.S. participation in Libya's civil war.

.

Paez writes that in sum, 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g) demonstrates that Congress intended for state officers to systematically aid in immigration enforcement only under the close supervision of the Attorney General — to whom Congress granted discretion in determining the precise conditions and direction of each state officer’s assistance.

.

USA vs Arizona : The Heart of the Ruling of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals against SB 1070 is the obstacle and conflict that the state law creates against existing Federal Statutory Law and the past intentions of Congress in creating written provisions for the fulfillment of Immigration Law.

The Powers of the Attorney General and Federal Agencies are clearly disregarded by SB 1070.

What a wonderful site !  - Clear explanations, Good Teaching, Learning is a pleasure in this excellent blog :


Ideas, Observations, and Mental Machinations
USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART TWO
April 14, 2011


USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART TWO


Some excerpts :

...................................

Congress, Paez says, has instructed under what conditions state officials are permitted to assist the Executive in the enforcement of immigration laws. Congress has provided that the Attorney General “may enter into a written agreement with a State . . . pursuant to which an officer or employee of the State . . . who is determined by the Attorney General to be qualified to perform a function of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States . . . may carry out such function.” 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(1). Subsection (g)(3) provides that “in performing a function under this subsection, an officer . . . of a State . . . shall be subject to the direction and supervision of the Attorney General.” 8 U.S.C. § 1357(g)(3). Subsection (g)(5) requires that the written agreement must specify “the specific powers and duties that may be, or are required to be, exercised or performed by the individual, the duration of the authority of the individual, and the position of the agency of the Attorney General who is required to supervise and direct the individual .”

The provisions of the INA, according to Paez, demonstrate that Congress intended for states to be involved in the enforcement of immigration laws under the Attorney General’s close supervision. Not only must the Attorney General approve of each individual state officer, he or she must delineate which functions each individual officer is permitted to perform.

...................................
...................................

The Heart of the Ruling

The Ninth Circuit finds ample rationale for applying the federal preemption doctrine. Paez writes that by imposing mandatory obligations on state and local officers, Arizona interferes with the federal government’s authority to implement its priorities and strategies in law enforcement, turning Arizona officers into state-directed DHS agents. As a result, Section 2(B) interferes with Congress’ delegation of discretion to the Executive branch in enforcing the INA.

S.B. 1070 Section 2(B) “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress” as expressed in the aforementioned INA provisions. The law subverts Congress’ intent that systematic state immigration enforcement will occur under the direction and close supervision of the Attorney General. Furthermore, the mandatory nature of Section 2(B)’s immigration status checks is inconsistent with the discretion Congress vested in the Attorney General to supervise and direct State officers in their immigration work according to federally-determined priorities.

.

British Guardian : Simon Tisdall : "Britain is now publicly doing what it expressly said it would not do when the no-fly intervention began : putting boots on the ground in Libya" - Mission Creep

.
British Guardian
The Libyan mission is creeping, no doubt
With Britain sending a 'military liaison advisory team' to Libya, how many more boots on the ground will follow?
By Simon Tisdall
Tuesday April 19, 2011


The Libyan mission is creeping, no doubt


Some excerpts :

Mission creep is an unpleasant condition brought on by a surfeit of military ambition and lack of self-knowledge. Symptoms include fantasy-like delusions such as the highly contagious belief, known as Sarkozy-itis, that the sufferer alone knows what's best for the world. This is typically followed by cold sweats and hot flushes when political reality proves otherwise. Mission creep is not treatable and hindsight is the only cure. It usually ends in disaster.

Such was the case in Vietnam, where President John F Kennedy's decision to increase the number of US "military advisers" to the south Vietnamese regime opened the path to all-out war. Mission creep struck again after the US intervened in Somalia in the early 1990s, producing another debacle. In fact the term was coined at that time by the distinguished Washington Post columnist, Jim Hoagland. Afghanistan since 2001 has been not so much creep as rapid crawl into a military never-never land.

Britain's announcement that it is sending a "military liaison advisory team" of experienced officers to Benghazi to assist the rebels' national transitional council looks like another outbreak of the disease. Foreign secretary William Hague was adamant the British army was not taking charge of the campaign against Muammar Gaddafi. The "advisers" would not be arming, training or directing the rebel forces, he said. To which the world-weary response must be: just give them time.

Britain is now publicly doing what it expressly said it would not do when the no-fly intervention began: putting boots on the ground in Libya. France is taking similar action. Given that the rebel forces have convincingly demonstrated their inability to win on their own, given the sizeable negatives for David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy of an open-ended, inconclusive conflict, and given Barack Obama's flat refusal to do any more, the question now is: how many more British and French boots will follow, sooner or later, in the advisers' fateful footsteps?

.

I may be a Fool of a Liberal and Leftist, but I will never believe in the Socialists of the Western Hemisphere : Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa.

.

Yes, I may be wrong in many of my ideas - God did not give me a patent for correctness and certitude, I may err and commit many mistakes. I may be influenced by passions, events, upbringing, conflicts, fights with assholes, idiotic internet trolls, cretins in forums, etc ...

Note : those last mentioned cretins only make me more liberal and less right wing .....  ( Yes, I may have some shameful right wing inclinations in my subconscious but aggressive trolls return me to soundness and reason ).

I can not believe in the Good of Hugo Chavez and his miracles and wonders in Venezuela ...

One of the reasons of my disbelief is that I frequently talk to travelers and to the same Venezuelans that receive the benefits of such Great Statesman ... ( many are very close friends of mine )

I also have talked to many Cubans that fled the Island and I can see that such communism only produces Backwardness and Economic Poverty.

The other rulers that I mentioned are also Narcissist Idiots and enemies of Free Expression, they have a touch of madness and a penchant for conflicts with all the neighboring nations.

Venezuela is a country dedicated to the promotion of Santa Claus Economy .... Where the Government buys the "hearts and minds" of ignorants by means of subsidies, gifts, bribes, etc ...

This produces generalized corruption, many subsidized products are exported to Colombia and reintroduced in Venezuela at higher prices.

The system of controlled prices can not be more absurd and counterproductive ...

While in the "Poor" Colombia you find everything and the super markets are filled with the most strange and rare products ( because of free market economics and free capitalism ) , in "Rich" and Socialist Venezuela you only find loneliness and solitude in super markets ..

Oil seems like a curse for Oil Rich Countries and the OPEP ( Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries )

Backwardness, Wars, Unrest, Revolutions, Revolts, Foreign Intervention, Santa Claus Economies.

People are very happy with the No Tax Economies and vote for the tyrant and despot.

I do not believe in Freedom of Expression or Free Press in Venezuela. And I do not believe in clean elections there.

Vicente Duque

Best Site on SB 1070 : "In the context of unauthorized immigrant employment, Congress has deliberately crafted a very particular calibration of force which does not include the criminalization of work. By criminalizing work, S.B. 1070 Section 5(C) constitutes a substantial departure

.
from the approach Congress has chosen to battle this particular problem." :

This is the best site on "SB 1070" or at least the blog where I understand more of the material, like studying with a wonderful teacher that explains with clarity many issues of Federal Preemption.

In a split decision from a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals the of Arizona's Federal Judge Susan Bolton has been upheld in the case of the United States v. Arizona, the SB1070 case. The panel produced three written opinions, the first by Judge Richard Paez, a concurring opinion by Judge John T. Noonan, and a dissent from Judge Carlos T. Bea.

USA v. ARIZONA - THE SB1070 CASE ON APPEAL - PART FOUR


Some excerpts :

Paez makes the distinction between Congressional intent and Arizona's statute.  "In the context of unauthorized immigrant employment, Congress has deliberately crafted a very particular calibration of force which does not include the criminalization of work. By criminalizing work, S.B. 1070 Section 5(C) constitutes a substantial departure from the approach Congress has chosen to battle this particular problem." Since Congress did not intend to criminalize employment by the unlawful alien Arizona's SB1070 creates an obstacle to the regulatory scheme adopted by Congress.

Finding that this section, like §2(B) has a detrimental effect on the foreign affairs of the nation Paez went on to find that "the United States has met its burden to show that there is likely no set of circumstances under which S.B. 1070 Section 5(C) would not be preempted, and it is likely to succeed on the merits of its challenge. The district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding the same."

.

Answering a Friendly Note : Why Am I in the Internet ?? - What is it that I do being in the Web ?? - Why do I post or comment ?? - What is the purpose of all this ??

.
Thanks Friend for your kind note :

This is a service that I give to other people. Because all this stuff is very difficult to find.

Sometimes I "steal" materials or ideas of very wonderful sites like "Immigration Talk with a Mexican American" or "Two Weeks Notice" ...

Of course a great part of my work is to show the wonders of beautiful political sites like Huffington Post or POLITICO.COM .... I also user "Real Clear Politics" or "Real Clear World" ..

But the most important stuff is extremely difficult to find and I have to do many searches in Search Engines like Google and others.

I do not send emails to others, because I lack the time .... Finding material is very time consuming.

The fact that I link to an article or a page does not mean that I agree with the author. Sometimes I link to extremely conservative guys or even to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck to show the utter stupidity.

Some guys like George F. Will are very conservative but extremely intelligent. If he says something intelligent that does not mean that I agree with his politics, only with a good article.

Other guys like Charles Krauthammer are crazy with Jingoism and Hyper Patriotism, but we can link an article of this guy, if it serves a purpose, or if he found an interesting idea.

That does not mean that I want to bomb Iran or that I applaud and approve more wars. This is a free service, so that people do not consume so much time finding interesting special material.

My material lacks interest for many people or for the majority of the people. I am aware of that. But this is not a business or a popularity contest.

Some material is very difficult to understand, and I do not claim to be an expert in "Supremacy Clause" or "Federal Preemption" ... I do not understand everything that the U. S. Supreme Court  rules.

And I can not enter discussion on these legal or judicial topics, because that is not my aim. My goal is to save time for researchers interested in Democratic Politics, Democratic Party, Immigration, Department of Justice, Supreme Court, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, etc ...

So when people are challenging me, specially those that are not my best friends. I just skip and pass to another topic, chore, work, hobby or entertainment.

Thanks Again

 

Vicente Duque

The National Interest : "West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering" - By prolonging the war the allies have increased suffering - If this was simply Muammar Qaddafi versus George Washington .....

.
The West and its leaders are completely ignorant of what is going on in Libya, who the rebels are, etc ... etc ....



The National Interest
West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering
April 18, 2011

By Doug Bandow
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He is a former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan and the author of several books, including Foreign Follies: America’s New Global Empire (Xulon Press).



West Exacerbates Libyans' Suffering


Some excerpts :

The tendency of public officials to misstate and mislead is well established. Put three national leaders together and the deceptions more than triple. At least, that is the lesson from the article, “Libya’s Pathway to Peace,” authored last week by President Barack Obama, Prime Minister David Cameron, and President Nicolas Sarkozy.

The falsehoods begin with the title. The allies have joined the insurgents in a civil war against the previously recognized government. The path is war and all that entails: death, destruction, and chaos.

.................

Still, there’s nothing to worry about. Only bad guys die and only good consequences occur in humanitarian wars. When conservatives like George W. Bush bomb another country, it necessarily is a costly disaster. When liberals like Barack Obama do so, it necessarily is a grand success. By definition.

...................

That would be fine if the contending sides were simply Muammar Qaddafi versus George Washington. But there is no evidence that the leading advocates of war actually know anything about Libya or its people. The country is sharply divided by region and tribe. Qaddafi represents one cluster of interests; the opposition represents a very different set.

.................

The point deserves repeating. Most Libyan civilians are dying today because their country is convulsed by civil war. By prolonging the war the allies have increased suffering. In fact, war advocates are employing a simple but bloody bootstrap argument: intervening has made the war costlier to average people, and that higher cost justifies more intensive intervention. It’s an ingenious but dishonest argument.

Perhaps most problematic is the allied leaders’ contention that their purpose “is not to remove Qaddafi by force,” but that “so long as Qaddafi is in power, NATO must maintain its operations.” Similarly, the three close their article: “Britain, France, and the United States will not rest until the United Nations Security Council resolutions have been implemented and the Libyan people can choose their own future.”

....................

Paris wants to expand the bombing, but that bandwagon is a unicycle. No other government responded to desperate British and French pleas for additional assistance at the NATO foreign ministers summit last week. Messrs. Cameron and Sarkozy got the war they wanted, but which their countries were not prepared to wage. In these circumstances, will any of the Big Three use ground forces if that is the only way to force a decision?

The Libyan war seems almost unique in its mix of frivolous decision-making, confused objectives, minimal benefits, and bungled execution. The best outcome is just a small train wreck. But if the quality of arguments on public display by the three leaders represents the quality of decision-making behind the scenes, the result is likely to be far costlier for the Libyan as well as allied peoples. Yet again, we see why war should be a last rather than first resort.

.

British Guardian Newspaper : British Empire, Violence and Brutality, Empire still lives, Are we Brits Angels or Devils ?? - Still doing "Imperialist" things - Mysterious Boxes abandoned in an old house condemn us

.

Madeleine Bunting of the British "Guardian" has fought forgetfulness and British Parties insisting that the past be left behind. What a mistake that has been ! - "Empire was good, We Brits were the Good Guys", Pleading ignorance or forgetfulness to mask Ruthless Ambition, Violence and Brutality.

British Guardian
The endgames of our empire never quite finished – just look at Bahrain
The discovery of the Mau Mau boxes reveals a lot more about the British government than just archival mismanagement
By Madeleine Bunting
Sunday April 17, 2011


The endgames of our empire never quite finished – just look at Bahrain


Some excerpts :

Second, this imperial endgame explains so much about today: for instance, the growing crisis in Bahrain, where new arrests over the weekend appear to herald a fresh bout of violent repression, and why we are not currently bombing this Gulf state with as much enthusiasm as we are Libya.

It has been one of the most successful chapters in British imperial domination; the Al Khalifa dynasty signed its first treaty with the British in 1820 and they finally "left" in 1971. The British have backed a repressive regime in a very cosy, mutually advantageous relationship of finance, military training, arms deals and royal ceremony (one of the less edifying aspects of the imperial endgame has been the use of the royal family to flatter and seduce client regimes, however unpalatable). In the last few months the Bahrain government has beaten, killed, tortured the Shia protest movement. On Saturday, the Guardian reported that Bahraini students who had protested against this repression in Britain now feared violent reprisals. The west has done little but mumble incoherently; too many interests are at stake to live up to the grand moral rhetoric now being lavished on Libya.

In Asia, Bahrain is characterised as evidence of the west's endemic hypocrisy: it promotes democracy and human rights only when it suits its self-interest. It's a sobering reminder that the day will come when we are no longer the ones who decide how our history is told.

Pleading ignorance or forgetfulness of the imperial record will hardly wash. Indeed, one of the most striking continuities of Britain's quest for power has been a studied forgetfulness. It was often said Britain acquired an empire "in a fit of absence of mind", and much the same appearance of distracted pragmatism – a sort of "we do what has to be done with no great masterplan" – applied to the imperial endgame. Very quickly, empire became an obscure subject reserved for a few historians to worry about; everyone else was instructed to "move on". Has any empire been so quickly forgotten by its imperialists as Britain's?

Forgetfulness proved a clever way to mask ruthless ambition. And, as we have seen in the last week, it's also a deft manoeuvre to conceal official complicity in brutal violence. Muddle, confusion. "Oops, dear me, we have a problem with archival management." It's been the Miss Marple model of empire, but who are we kidding?

.

Colin Walsh, Key Witness, told the truth in horrible Racist Crime, sentenced to 55 months in Federal Prison - He was very brave and courageous amidst all of the racial anger that surrounded these trials - Shenandoah Pennsylvania was Brutal and Racist after the murder

.
We hope the best for this guy that was brave and showed valor after the horrible mistake - this was the keystone of the prosecution against two great bastards and cowards and against a town that was mad with Racism and Brutality.




Immigration Talk with a Mexican American
By Dee from Texas
Sunday, April 17, 2011

Justice for Luis Ramirez: Colin Walsh Admitted His Role and Will Now Serve His Time


Some excerpts :

Colin Walsh, the young man who told the truth to the Feds regarding the murder of Luis Ramirez, was sentenced to 55 months in Federal Prison today. Viewers who followed the Luis Ramirez story here recall that Walsh was the only young man that told the truth to both Prosecutors and to the Feds. This resulted in the incarceration of both Piekarsky and Donchek for being the actual people who inflicted the blows that killed Luis Ramirez. From the beginning, Walsh said he was sorry. He was brave amidst all of the racial anger that surrounded these trials. Thanks to Walsh, there was Justice for Luis and his children. Now, even as Walsh goes to prison, he says his punishment is fair and it will, in the end, make his life better. Our prayers are with him as he accepts the punishment for his role in this crime. May this help lead to the end of ALL HATE CRIMES!

.

Majority-minority as of 2009: Hawaii, New Mexico, California, and Texas. The percentage of non-Hispanic white residents has fallen below 60% in Maryland, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, New York, New Jersey, Mississippi, and Florida

.
This data needs to be updated with the 2010 Census. See beautiful USA maps of Racial Location for Whites and Minorities :




The District of Columbia reached a majority black status during the latter stages of the Great Migration.


All populated United States territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa) are majority-minority areas.


7 of the 40 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S. are majority-minority.


As of 2008, 10% of U.S. counties are now majority-minority. Another 7% are near the tipping point and are predicted to become majority-minority soon.


More Information here :


Minority-majority state in Wikipedia

.

CNN : White people are now in the minority in 46 of the nation's 366 metro areas, including New York, Washington, San Diego, Las Vegas and Memphis, said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution

.
CNN
New York, San Diego no longer have white majorities
April 14th, 2011


New York, San Diego no longer have white majorities


Some excerpts :

New census data confirm that some major metropolitan areas flipped from majority white to majority populations of minorities during the past decade.

White people are now in the minority in 46 of the nation's 366 metro areas, including New York, Washington, San Diego, Las Vegas and Memphis, said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution.

That number is up from 32 in 2000, 10 in 1990 and nine in 1980, Frey said.

The changes are a result of relatively slow growth among the white population, white people moving outside metropolitan areas, and huge increases in minority populations, especially Hispanic and Asian, he said.

Recent analysis also showed white children are in the minority in 10 states.

.

What is "Preemption" ?? - Is it important for America ?? - What if the Supreme Court passes or approves SB 1070 ?? -- Fast Track to sink the American Empire !

.
From the "Free Dictionary"


preemption - the judicial principle asserting the supremacy of federal over state legislation on the same subject

pre-emption - judicial doctrine, judicial principle, legal principle - (law) a principle underlying the formulation of jurisprudence

Let's assume that the Supreme Court approves SB 1070 :

This would mean the total preeminence of the States over the Federal Government in the matters of Foreign Policy, Immigration, etc ...

That was exactly the Allegation,  Assertion or Allegement of the Confederacy : States are totally sovereign and secession is always a possibility ( Remember a recent Republican Texas Governor ?? ) - So who won the American Civil War ??

If SB 1070 is passed and approved by the Supreme Court then States can legislate on the Human and the Divine, without counting with the Federal Government.

If the States can do anything .... then what is the use of Federal Judges, Federal Government and the United States Supreme Court ??.  --- What is the leadership of the President of the United States ??

People do not see beyond their noses - They think that this is about ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, but this is a sickness that is deeper than that, deeper than some Mexican Laborers eager to work for a little food.

This is a fast track to sink the American Empire - The Fifty States can do anything ....

I do not need to be a professor of law at Harvard or Chicago ( like President Obama ) to understand that ...

Vicente Duque
.

Obama 2012 : Focus on three states that Obama won last time – Virginia, Colorado and Nevada – that provide different paths to victory as an alternative to the traditional dependence on Ohio and Florida. But Obamites are eyeing Texas, Arizona and Georgia – three states he lost last time – as potential targets

.
POLITICO.COM
Barack Obama reelect’s first job: Reconnect
By MIKE ALLEN
April 15, 2011


Barack Obama reelect’s first job: Reconnect


Some excerpts :

This election will be decided in States with Warm Climates ( or at least not very cold ) - Axelrod and Obama plan an assault with the weapons of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, CellPhones, Blackberries and a lot of new gadgets that youngsters use .... Those gadgets are called "smart phones" iPhones and other mobile devices that charm and captivate youngsters.

The Republican field is fractured and looks weak, but Obama advisers say they are preparing for a ferocious campaign that could once again come down to a couple of swing states. The advisers contend that the country is far too closely divided to imagine a re-election scenario like 1996, when Bob Dole never came within striking distance of President Bill Clinton.

The biggest concerns include independent voters, who are fickle by definition, and Midwestern, blue-collar white men, who were the last demographic group to go along with Obama in 2008.

“We won last time, in what was called a landslide, with 53 percent of the vote, which tells you how small the margin for error is,” Axelrod said.

Democratic officials are intently focused on three states that Obama won last time – Virginia, Colorado and Nevada – that provide different paths to victory as an alternative to the traditional dependence on Ohio and Florida. But they are also trying to replicate the bold map strategy of 2008 by eyeing Texas, Arizona and Georgia – three states he lost last time – as potential targets. Changing demographics in the three states have yielded hundreds of thousands of currently unregistered Hispanic voters who could be receptive to Obama.

The campaign plans to lavish attention on Virginia, where the Senate campaign of former governor Tim Kaine will help them turn out young voters from Charlottesville to northern Virginia, and minority voters in Richmond and Hampton Roads. The Democratic National Convention is being held in Charlotte, N.C., in part because of the potential spillover benefits in southern Virginia.

..................

Axelrod has known Bill Daley, the White House chief of staff, for 30 years. He and David Plouffe, a senior adviser who functions as White House COO, were once business partners. And campaign manager Jim Messina was right-hand man to Plouffe when he ran Obama's 2008 campaign.

“The whole campaign benefits from being insulated from the day-to-day in Washington,” Axelrod said. “Everyone you run into is not pummeling you with the conventional wisdom. Secondly, symbolically, it’s important. We believe in grassroots politics. The impetus for our campaign – then, and now – is millions of people organizing. … Thirdly, because we are reaching out all over the country, Chicago is a very central location.”

Axelrod was the first to make the heartland move, leaving his role as White House senior adviser at the end of January to return to his longtime home, where he once was a political reporter for the Chicago Tribune. Now, he’s enjoying walks along Lake Michigan, has trimmed down enough that he fits into old suits he had not worn in years, and has ordered a Ford Escape hybrid.

.....................

All of these plans are being made in an obvious vacuum: No one is sure who Obama’s opponent will be. Top Democrats seem convinced it will wind up being Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty, but even that is unpredictable in a race where at least a couple of winners are likely to emerge from the early-voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

Democratic officials are convinced that winning the GOP nomination may require vitriol and partisanship that may position the winner poorly for the general election. That’s why some Obama advisers were secretly delighted when Republican congressional leaders took the bait and lashed out at the president after his deficit-reduction speech Wednesday, in which he had baited them with some harsh rhetoric of his own.

Axelrod worries chiefly about things he can’t control or predict – a change in the trajectory of the economy, or an unsettling event late in the campaign.

“I am confident, but also vigilant,” he said. “I know we’re going to have to work for this.”

.

Political scientist Donald Lutz found that Montesquieu was the most frequently quoted authority on government and politics in colonial pre-revolutionary British America, cited more by the American founders than any source except for the Bible

.
The Importance of an Independent Judicial Power to oppose excesses of legislatures or parliaments as the anti-immigrant laws that we are watching lately in Arizona and Georgia :

Montesquieu and the Theory of Separation of Powers :

Montesquieu in Wikipedia


Some excerpts :

Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu (1689–1755) was a French social commentator and political philosopher. His theories deeply influenced the American Founders, especially his belief that the state powers should be separated into legislative, executive, and judicial branches, which formed the basis for separation of powers under the United States Constitution.

.....................

After having studied at the Catholic College of Juilly, Charles-Louis de Secondat married. His wife, Jeanne de Lartigue, a Protestant, brought him a substantial dowry when he was 26. The next year, he inherited a fortune upon the death of his uncle, as well as the title Baron de Montesquieu and Président à Mortier in the Parliament of Bordeaux. By that time, England had declared itself a constitutional monarchy in the wake of its Glorious Revolution (1688–89), and had joined with Scotland in the Union of 1707 to form the Kingdom of Great Britain. In 1715 the long-reigning Louis XIV died and was succeeded by the five-year-old Louis XV. These national transformations impacted Montesquieu greatly; he would later refer to them repeatedly in his work.

Soon afterwards, he achieved literary success with the publication of his Lettres persanes (Persian Letters, 1721), a satire based on the imaginary correspondence of a Persian visitor to Paris, pointing out the absurdities of contemporary society. He next published Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence (Considerations on the Causes of the Grandeur and Decadence of the Romans, 1734), considered by some scholars a transition from The Persian Letters to his master work. De l'Esprit des Lois (The Spirit of the Laws) was originally published anonymously in 1748 and quickly rose to a position of enormous influence. In France, it met with an unfriendly reception from both supporters and opponents of the regime. The Catholic Church banned l'Esprit – along with many of Montesquieu's other works – in 1751 and included it on the Index of Prohibited Books. It received the highest praise from the rest of Europe, especially Britain.

Montesquieu was also highly regarded in the British colonies in America as a champion of British liberty (though not of American independence). Political scientist Donald Lutz found that Montesquieu was the most frequently quoted authority on government and politics in colonial pre-revolutionary British America, cited more by the American founders than any source except for the Bible. Following the American secession, Montesquieu's work remained a powerful influence on many of the American founders, most notably James Madison of Virginia, the "Father of the Constitution". Montesquieu's philosophy that "government should be set up so that no man need be afraid of another" reminded Madison and others that a free and stable foundation for their new national government required a clearly defined and balanced separation of powers.

Besides composing additional works on society and politics, Montesquieu traveled for a number of years through Europe including Austria and Hungary, spending a year in Italy and 18 months in England before resettling in France. He was troubled by poor eyesight, and was completely blind by the time he died from a high fever in 1755. He was buried in the Église Saint-Sulpice, Paris.

.