I think the obvious answer is yes. Well, let’s clarify what president I’m referring to. I’m in fact referring to Russell Pearce, Arizona’s senate president. According to Pearce, in a letter sent out to his supporters, he calls himself the senate Tea Party president. What an absolute joke. This man is like a leech on an a jack-ass’ arse. He’ll bleed anything around him so long as he can survive and fill his spineless body with that much needed blood.
It’s obvious Jan Brewer is stepping up to the plate for Pearce because she owes him big time. After all it was his anti-immigrant legislation SB1070 that propelled this inept, ex secretary of state, and worthless ex legislator to the top. Brewer has never denied it. Brewer is in fact the “sitting” governor of the state of Arizona, and that’s about as far as it goes. She is allowed to sit on the throne, but Pearce is actually our defacto Arizona governor. Pearce made his position very clear during a Sunday Square Off interview in which he said he was a co-partner in running this state and that, according to Pearce, “you can’t ignore the fact that senate bill 1070 had an impact on the governor’s race.” Anyway you want to spin that comment, politically it means one thing, you owe me big time guv.
So now that Pearce is in trouble, well, let me rephrase that, now that he has been placed in the predicament of a hasty election in November, Janice is groveling for money for her “dance partner”, of course he’s taken the lead as any self respecting chauvinistic Tea Party politician would in this political tango.
In any event Jan Brewer’s intervention in the upcoming November 8, 2011 election is barefaced and unapologetic, after all, she owes a debt. It’s quid pro quo time and Pearce has called in his chips, and Brewer has diligently responded like any cheap ballerina would with, what’s your song of choice Mr. Pearce? (make sure you read that with a southern drawl)
Pearce takes the lead in this political tango
Carlos E. Galindo is a radio talk show host & political analyst conducting radio shows in both English and Spanish on four radio stations in Arizona. Mr. Galindo is a weekly contributor to KPFK 98.7 FM Los Angeles and has appeared on CNN, Univision and Telemundo as a political analyst. Mr. Galindo is also an Op-Ed columnist on Prensa Hispana and the Tucson Citizen. Arizona. www.nospinonair.com/http://www.carlosgalindo.com
Listen to our live radio broadcast every Friday from 5-7 PM on The JOLT Tucson 1330 AM and every Saturday from 9-11 AM on KXXT 1010 AM Phoenix or via the web on www.nospinonair.com
On June 17, 2011 the Director of the Department of Homeland Security issued a stunning memorandum to the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The memo in part read as follows:
This memorandum provides U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel guidance on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion to ensure that the agency’s immigration enforcement resources are focused on the agency’s enforcement priorities. The memorandum also serves to make clear which agency employees may exercise prosecutorial discretion and what factors should be considered.
The turnabout in change and policy is a win for President Barack Obama and helps neutralize those who have been critical of his administration regarding Immigration policy and in particular enforcement, especially when it comes to the secure communities program placed in effect under the Bush administration, but that has continued in force under the Obama administration.
Pro Immigration advocates have been extremely critical of President Obama calling for a halt to deportations and immediate relief from congress in the form of the controversial legislation titled “Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act”, commonly referred to as the Dream Act. The Dream Act was originally penned and presented in August of 2001 and subsequently reintroduced once again to the Senate in May of 2011.
The memo issued by Morton addresses “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Priorities of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens.” Which includes the following:
• settling or dismissing a proceeding;
• granting deferred action, granting parole, or staying a final order of removal;
• agreeing to voluntary departure, the withdrawal of an application for admission, or other action in lieu of obtaining a formal order of removal;
• pursuing an appeal;
• executing a removal order; and
• responding to or joining in a motion to reopen removal proceedings and to consider joining in a motion to grant relief or a benefit.
Morton’s memo makes it clear that certain factors should be taken into consideration while excogitating prosecution of individuals in the United Stated unlawfully. The memo refers to the first set of these as positive factors. These individuals would essentially be given priority in expediting their cases for possible immediate release or deferral of arrest or prosecution.
The following positive factors should prompt particular care and consideration:
• veterans and members of the U.S. armed forces;
• long-time lawful permanent residents;
• minors and elderly individuals;
• individuals present in the United States since childhood;
• pregnant or nursing women;
• victims of domestic violence; trafficking, or other serious crimes;
• individuals who suffer from a serious mental or physical disability; and
• individuals with serious health conditions.
The next set is equally as important and further specifies those who would once again qualify for immediate release or deferral of arrest or prosecution.
The factors utilized for the following set would be what would essentially offer an escape valve for what are commonly referred to as the Dream Act students or for spouses of individuals married to U.S. Citizens or legal permanent residents who currently don’t qualify for relief under the existing Immigration statutes. Amongst those categories are the following:
• the agency’s civil immigration enforcement priorities;
• the person’s length of presence in the United States, with particular consideration given to presence while in lawful status;
• the circumstances of the person’s arrival in the United States and the manner of his or her entry,particularly if the alien came to the United States as a young child;
• the person’s pursuit of education in the United States, with particular consideration given to those who have graduated from a U.S. high school or have successfully pursued or are pursuing a college or advanced degrees at a legitimate institution of higher education in the United States;
• whether the person, or the person’s immediate relative,has served in the U.S. military, reserves, or national guard, with particular consideration given to those who served in combat;
• the person’s criminal history, including arrests, prior convictions, or outstanding arrest warrants;
• the person’s immigration history, including any prior removal, outstanding order of removal, prior denial of status, or evidence of fraud;
• whether the person poses a national security or public safety concern;
• the person’s ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships;
• the person’s ties to the home country and condition~ in the country;
• the person’s age, with particular consideration given to minors and the elderly;
• whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent;
• whether the person is the primary caretaker of a person with a mental or physical disability, minor, or seriously ill relative; ;
• whether the person or the person’s spouse is pregnant or nursing;
• whether the person or the person’s spouse suffers from severe mental or physical illness;
• whether the person’s nationality renders removal unlikely;
• Whether the person is likely to be granted temporary or permanent status or other relief from removal, including as a relative of a U.S. citizen or permanent resident;
• whether the person is likely to be granted temporary or permanent status or other relief from removal, including as an asylum seeker, or a victim of domestic violence, human trafficking, or other crime; . and .
• whether the person is currently cooperating or has cooperated with federal, state or local law enforcement authorities, such as ICE, the U.S Attorneys or Department of Justice, the Department of Labor, or National Labor Relations Board, among others.
It’s clear that Morton’s memo was a directive from the White House to Janet Napolitano the Secretary of Homeland Security, and was meant as a form of relief for what many see as an unjust prosecution of young adults who were brought to the U.S. as children by their parents.
It’s important to note that many of the adult Immigrants currently residing in the United States have been here most of their lives and have been integrated into the existing workforce that the U.S. desperately relies on for their low skilled labor.
The broadening of the prosecutorial discretion suggested in this memorandum will provide relief for a large majority of those currently listed as part of those 12 to 20 million undocumented Immigrants currently believed to be in the United States and could very well be a changing trend in how DHS deals with unlawful Immigrants that do not pose a security threat to the Unites States or its citizens, potentially setting the tempo for Comprehensive Immigration Reform within congress.
Carlos what do you think about those saying no support for Obama until he stops deporting?
My response may make some of you angry, but at least you know I am honest. I say what many of you think, but are not willing to say. By the way, the Rethuglicans need not jump on board. You are what’s wrong with Arizona and the United States.
So here is my response to the aforementioned question:
It’s the typical shoot yourself in the foot mentality. Let’s see what’s the alternative? Romney? Nah, don’t think he’ll stop the deportations! Oh, I know, Herman Cain, oh…he is afraid of Muslims and he said they shouldn’t permit birthright citizenship for children of undocumented parents, Ron Paul said the same! So he’s not the guy! Should I go on?
We all know there won’t be opposition from the Dems in the primary, so……. It’s Obama and whomever the Rethuglicans nominate. So would we want any of those thugs sitting as Commander in Chief. Will they stop the deportations? NO….We know how much the GOP uses the undocumented people issue to rev up their base!
All these nay sayers are hurting because of what is happening to our people. I am too. Believe me I advocate every day and have been arrested and threatened and my wife was even assaulted, However, I’m a pragmatist while still allowing myself to dream at least a little. These nay sayers that claim they won’t support President Obama should just stop with their support of the Rethuglicans! Oh, did I say that out loud?
Any negative feedback for President Obama lends credibility to the right’s complaints and fuels the fire. It’s time the Dem lights and the failed leaders shut up! They didn’t do a damn thing when Bush was in office! Most of these policies, including the “secure communities” program were put in place under Bush’s administration.
These pseudo leaders and pseudo activists ran their non-profits, marched people in the streets and refused to register them to vote. Then they expected to bully their way through the political system. For years they profited from the oppressed who yearn for CIR. They have failed to properly lead and meet the needs of our beloved undocumented friends and family members. They didn’t stop to realize that the Blacks were in line, the gays were in line, the people demanding health care were in line, the Dems with power who supported Obama were in line. Everyone had and has had their hand out. No! They’ve had their fists out! They have been pounding it, insisting they will bail out on any support for President Obama if he doesn’t cough up what they want.
Victoria, just stop and think, if each state would have had the proper leadership, and had they been pragmatists when they saw what Bush was doing and how Immigrants were being used as scapegoats, they could have and should have prevented this attack at a state level.
However, you see these same activists in bed with the police chiefs who are more harmful with their police forces than Joe Arpaio! Daily they detain and arrest our people for things that are absurd, e.g. broken tail lights, broken windshields etc. They then take them to the local jail for processing through the 287g program. You have never seen these pseudo activists or pseudo leaders go after the local politicians, such as the mayors who hold hands with these police chiefs. They don’t go after the city council members who pass city rules that deny the acceptance of the matricula consular as an alternative identification to present to police officers, like they did here in Phoenix many years before the actual matricula law was passed this legislative session.
No Victoria, this is a much more complex issue. The local pseudo leaders and activists in each state and each “Latino” organization like to point fingers and yell at President Obama.
In the end, it diverts attention from their failed leadership.
In solidarity,
Carlos E. Galindo
What's your option? A Rethuglican?
Carlos E. Galindo is a radio talk show host & political analyst conducting radio shows in both English and Spanish on four radio stations in Arizona. Mr. Galindo is a weekly contributor to KPFK 98.7 FM Los Angeles and has appeared on CNN, Univision and Telemundo as a political analyst. Mr. Galindo is also an Op-Ed columnist on Prensa Hispana Arizona. www.nospinonair.com/http://www.carlosgalindo.com
Listen to our live radio broadcast every Friday from 5-7 PM on The JOLT Tucson 1330 AM or via the web on www.nospinonair.com
In 2009 I read a short statement to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. At that time I unequivocally stated that Arizona’s economy would continue going into the ditch if the attack upon their low skilled labor continued. I have continually asked the question, when will national economists provide reports or statistics reflecting the true detrimental economic impact on Arizona created by it’s failed immigration policies?
Whether on my radio show or in my writings I have always used a clear and very basic example to illustrate what is happening to Arizona. “The house of cards will always collapse when you pull the bottom card out.” So it has been, as we have watched in horror, as Arizona’s lawmakers create laws that lend credence to an attack upon the very foundation of Arizona’s economic infrastructure, our low skilled labor force comprised in majority of undocumented Immigrants.
Being a first generation Immigrant, business owner and a member of Arizona’s media has permitted me to better understand the plight of the immigrants, and of course, the value of the immigrants. I fully understand their buying trends, their most intimate fears, as well as their strengths and weaknesses.
As the attack upon those Immigrants via a racial hyped and politically charged populous commenced, I started to see the change in purchasing patterns and a tightening of the financial belt by the Immigrant community. It’s common nature to hoard or bank money for a rainy day or difficult times. Immigrants however, are a very financially astute community. They are certainly savers, and, they are consistent spenders when the economy permits it. They understand the importance of savings, be it for those difficult times that no one can foresee, or for that all expected and dreaded time in which they or a family member may face deportation and ultimately a high bond while sitting in the holding cell at the Immigration & Customs Enforcement building.
There is no doubt that we have all observed a mass exodus since the “attack” began. Senate President Russell Pearce proudly calls it attrition by enforcement. After the initial wave of laws I started to see the results of Arizona’s irresponsible legislation and aggressive law enforcement policies. Arizona’s failure to understand the complexities involved in embracing the Immigrant community while balancing the enforcement of existing laws that serve to protect our communities has been glaringly evident. I think we all understand that we can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Arizona desperately needs to know how to balance for the good of Arizona.
Recently we observed a slight change in Arizona’s fiftieth legislature when they overwhelmingly shot down five harsh immigration laws as a result of constant protests at the Arizona State Capitol by people of all walks of life and all colors of skin, that, coupled with a letter that carried a resounding no from CEO’s of huge corporations caused Arizona’s legislature to take a step back, or should I say, a step towards the center regarding the current Immigration policies.
Just a short two weeks after some of the more aggressive bills proposed by Arizona’s fiftieth legislature were shot down, a report from Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center titled “A Rising Tide or a Shrinking Pie” has been released. A clear and concise outline of the value of the Immigrants in Arizona and the the devastating impact their absence will have on Arizona.
The report for me is just a confirmation of what many of us that have no voice in Arizona fiftieth legislature have been aware of for many years. Perhaps as more organizations churn out the undeniable facts and the statistics continue to pour in, Arizona will turn the corner on Immigration and embrace those who built the roads Arizonan’s currently drive on, those who built their houses they sleep in every night, picked the vegetables and fruits they enjoy with their families every evening and those who cook those delicious meals they devour on their lunch hour daily.
Until then, I will continue in resistance at the Arizona State Capitol lending a voice and lobbying for those who have no voice or representation within Arizona’s fiftieth legislature as I have been for the last 32 days straight.
Carlos E. Galindo is a radio talk show host & political analyst conducting radio shows in both English and Spanish on four radio stations in Arizona. Mr. Galindo is a weekly contributor to KPFK 98.7 FM Los Angeles and has appeared on CNN, Univision and Telemundo as a political analyst. Mr. Galindo is also an Op-Ed columnist on Prensa Hispana Arizona. www.nospinonair.com/http://www.carlosgalindo.com
Listen to our live radio broadcast every Friday from 5-7 PM on The JOLT Tucson 1330 AM or via the web on www.nospinonair.com
When Esther called my “Straight Talk Tucson” show this past Friday, I quickly understood that her and I didn’t see eye to eye on the subject of the 14th amendment and Arizona’s attempt to create legislation that will ultimately be challenged all the bloody way to the the U.S. Supreme Court. I’m okay with people not agreeing with me, honest! I know, I know, as a radio talk show host I tend to be loudmouthed and opinionated, but that in no way demerits my arguments. I have always told my radio listeners and my critics, you may not like my delivery method, but you can’t argue with reason.
Let’s get something straight here, I don’t jump on board an issue defined solely by its left or right slant. I take up an issue based on whether it’s the right thing to do, in other words, whether it’s morally correct and whether it’s good for my state and for my country. Arizona’s attempt to supersede our Federal laws has been evident for a long time. You and I know that. It has increased exponentially since a merry band of misfits took office. It appears the Republicans in Arizona were not happy with just operating as a dictatorship for the last 43 years here in our great state. At one point they became so cocky that whether by design or just following each others lead, they started a concerted effort to repudiate Federal laws and the nation’s civil rights provisions. It didn’t matter if the law said you couldn’t do that, as far as Arizona was and is concerned, they are the law. That was evident when Russell Pearce was interviewed regarding the posted A.R.S. statute that prohibits weapons in the senate chambers at our state capitol. He quickly invoked his right to supersede Arizona’s criminal code while sitting as the Supreme leader of Arizona’s senate. Russell Pearce stated, “The Senate President, just like the Speaker of the House, by constitution, controls, through rule, this chamber,” “and, uh, so uh, again, and I recognize that. It supersedes the law.” If you don’t find that attitude scary and disturbing, then perhaps you might consider moving to North Korea they have a guy a lot like Pearce.
So Pearce, Brewer, Montenegro, Kavanagh, Harper, Gould, and every other Republican that wants to jump on the anti-Immigrant bandwagon throw out words like anchor baby, and illegals and talk about an invasion. It’s no wonder Esther my caller gets hyped up and finds the use of offensive terminology like “anchor baby” acceptable. I would like to know at what time in history it become okay to call Immigrants “wetbacks”, “cockroaches, “illegals” and their U.S. born children “anchor babies”. If you can’t use the “N” word for blacks, the “K” word for Jews, the “S” word for Italians. Well you get the drift. Why would it be acceptable to demean Immigrants, primarily Mexicans in 2011 Arizona? Has Arizona sunk so low that Esther and Arizonans like her, toss offensive words around as part of their normal dialog? I can just imagine what kind of word bantering occurs behind the closed doors of these like minded terror induced brainwashed Arizonans. I would love to be a fly on their wall, with a tiny recorder of course.
One can only wonder what type of violence all this hateful language could invoke. I mean you could end up with a white neighbor coming over to a Latino neighbor’s front yard and start an argument over one of Arizona’s laws like SB1070 and it could escalate to the point where the white neighbor could start using foul words like “wetback” and “go back to Mexico” and eventually he could pull out a gun and kill the Latino neighbor. After all, the use of these type of words desensitizes people. These type of words make you hate and want to kill. Oh wait, that already happened on May 6, 2010 when Gary Thomas Kelley killed Juan Varela. How many more arguments leading to violence can we expect because of irresponsible rhetoric and panic inducing misinformation coupled with misdirected legislation that targets a certain sector of Arizona? The Latinos!
This hateful rhetoric has got to stop and it’s got to stop now! As far as I’m concerned anytime I hear someone use this type of language I’m going to call them out on it, or in the case of Esther the “anchor baby” lady, I’m going to dump the call and flush it. What will you do the next time you hear that kind of rhetoric?
Carlos E. Galindo is a radio talk show host & political analyst conducting radio shows in both English and Spanish on four radio stations in Arizona. Mr. Galindo is a weekly contributor to KPFK 98.7 FM Los Angeles and has appeared on CNN, Univision and Telemundo as a political analyst. Mr. Galindo is also an Op-Ed columnist on Prensa Hispana Arizona. www.nospinonair.com/www.carlosgalindo.com
