Long Time No Blog

So, I noticed it's been over a year since I posted anything on my blog!! *Gasp*

I had an interesting observation about my Twitter account yesterday...my only followers are A) Liberals B) Football Fans or C) Kentucky Basketball Fans. The people who retweet me the most are the football fans. Don't get me wrong I LOVE football, but I wonder if the American public has become jaded by politics. Do we not care anymore? Why? Inaction by our political leaders? Misunderstanding of the actual timeline of the political process. It got me thinking. Remember the video from "Schoolhouse Rock," "How a Bill Becomes a Law?" I think adults should have to watch it annually in slow motion!

I had another unsettling revelation when perusing my Facebook feed. So many people on my "friends" list "like" a page called "Stop Amnesty NOW!" Yes, that is an Anti-Immigration page. These are "Christians!" They are also people who obviously know nothing about our current immigration policies. Recently, I shared an Immigration Reform post. One guy posted a "thumbs down" in response. He is an atheist, so I can't recite Jesus' words on immigrants, however, there are basic human decency, empathy, and economic advantages to consider. I haven't seen a study yet that proves a pathway to citizenship would cause economic harm...to the contrary the evidence presented by most economists shows a significant positive impact on everything from job creation to tax revenue.

Well, those are just a couple of my insomnia induced ramblings. Back to watching a preseason football game I have already seen. Tomorrow is a new day of stalking my Spanish Advisor who refuses to return phone calls and emails.

More Facebook Rants:

In response to the status: "Romney is a douche"

Anonymous:
I know right, y would we want to elect a man that has morals and values.. That wants our country to succeed and be prosper, yea what a douche right? Come on, Obama has done nothing for our country, please tell me what he has done to help our country.. Hell he won't even where the American flag pin on his suits... That's the kind of man u want as a president...

Me:
A man with morals and values would not demand to see POTUS' birth certificate, just because he is the son of a Kenyan. Nor would a man of character keep his money in off shore bank account so that he doesn't have to pay taxes on his money t
o the US. That's a lot more unpatriotic than wearing a pin. I pay taxes on my savings & am proud to do so. It is part of being an American. I'll tell you something he's done, he tried to pass the DREAM Act twice and both times it was passed by the senate and blocked by John Boehner and his cronies that have said they will vote against anything he proposes--even if it is a step in the right direction. So, he issued an Executive Order for the Dream Act! Finally. The children that we educated can be residents of the US and pay in taxes!!

Anonymous:
Wow, I'd like to see his birth certificate, why hide it? Is he even a American? So what if he keeps his money in off shore accounts? So we going to punish successful people who bust there ass to live a successful life? I didn't know that's
a bad thing? And trying to block what Obama does, he hasn't done anything to be blocked! Obama is a socialist that wants this country to fail and rely on welfare and hand outs, everyone wants something handed to them, what happened to hard work, and working for a living, but now let's re-elect a president that will give hand outs so people can live off the government, what a bunch of lazy asses..

Me:
You couldn't be more off base with your fallacies of logic. He did not "hide" his birth certficate. He is the 1st president in US history to have ever been asked to provide it...and when he did, they demanded the long form one. I didn't even n
eed that to get my passport! Please check Mitt Romney's ACTUAL work history. Most of his money was made off investments. And the money he invested was handed down to him through trusts from his father. I just told you one thing he has done. Apparently you do not want to see what is in front of your eyes. Healthcare is important to me. ONE of my 6 meds is $300/mo. I am a single mom and my job doesn't offer health insurance. I apply for lower paying jobs everyday, because they offer health insurance. To call President Obama a socialist is not just hyperbole, but out right false. Half of my family still lives in Bolivia. A real SOCIALIST country. When you go to the supermarket and it is called "USA grocery" or get your gas and it is called "USA Gas Station," you can talk to me. Coming from someone who has experienced real Socialism, that is disturbing. People should be careful throwing around terms they do not have a full grasp of.

Random Female: I love you, Michelle :)

Ignorance on the Internet is rampant!

My Facebook Rants

I need to stay away from Facebook when it comes to my personal opinions. Here are just a few examples why:

In response to a post that Dave Ramsey said that 47% of Americans pay zero in taxes.

Ah. The answer as to whom, is the very rich and the working poor-middle class. The statistic is VERY misleading to say the least. The truth is people are told when they get their first job that filling out a W-2 claiming your exemptions is "confusing, so just put zero." When you claim that you have zero exemptions, and then file your taxes, you find out you overpaid. Big surprise! So you get back all or almost all that you paid in, because if you had claimed your exemptions properly very little would be taken out of your check. Take for example single parents. If you do not receive child support and you earn below 180% of the poverty level, the government does not want you to use "entitlement benefits," so they give you EIC (Earned Income Tax Credit) to keep you above that line. Fine with me really. To me, it is an incentive to work and make as much money as possible because that refund check is WAY more than not working and receiving welfare. If you do the math maximum benefit of Welfare is $225/mo x 12 months. The average tax refund with EIC is around $3200. Plus, welfare is going to cut you off after 5 years and you and your children are SOL if you didn't get an education/job training during that time...plus the recipients have to volunteer 20 hours/week for the state. The way it's set up is great, because most of them draw for a few months and realize its just not worth it.
Oh, you have to have a child to be eligible for the EIC. That was clear as mud in my first post.

Duh, I forgot to mention SS recipients. The elderly and disabled (who paid in) have no taxed taken out of their check. So, what % of the Baby Boomers do think are retired? My dad and mom don't pay taxes out of their social security checks. Idk if his pension is taxed.

@Zac, one more thing I am going to infer from the phrase "residents in America," is that he was referring to Permanent Residents of the US, People residing in the US with a work visa (green card), or US citizens or else he would not have used those particular words. "Residents of America" is never used on Conservative/Moderate talk Radio..."illegal aliens" is. "Undocumented immigrants" is used by the government. (Well, in KY's state offices anyway). Many undocumented immigrants (like my father once was) use a Social Security number that they are not supposed to be using to work. (My dad was using a student visa to work, btw) The minute that social security number is put into the national database Federal taxes are deducted from that individual's paycheck. Even if that person and that social security number doesn't exist. In effect, it's an immigrant paying in taxes and benefits that they will never get recoup in terms of a tax refund or Federal benefits. Contrary to what people think, undocumented workers are not (and have never been) eligible to claim social security benefits. Moreover, most undocumented workers will use a false social security number to prove work authorization, therefore paying money into a benefit system that they will never be eligible to use.

According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), undocumented immigrants “account for a major portion” of the billions of dollars paid into the Social Security system under names or social security numbers that don’t match SSA records.

As of October 2005, the reported earnings on which these payments are based—which are tracked through the SSA’s Earnings Suspense File (ESF)—totaled $520 billion.

In Response to Someone being "sick and tired of posts Chik-Fil-A's stance on equal rights for LBGTs:

Makes me sad to see people who claim to follow the teachings of Christ doing the opposite. "Love thy neighbor as thyself." This doesn't exclude people who are born gay. Yes, as Roman Catholic raised in a Catholic home by a Scientist & a homemaker, I was taught as I got older to always stay on top of science...it is how God teaches us about life. The gene that causes a person to be gay has been isolated and identified. If someone has been born gay (like being born black/Latino/ or with special needs) it is not a conscious decision they made. I agree the media should butt out! I do my own research (as I was taught) and in 2011 Chik-Fil-A still donated to the group in Uganda that murders gays to "cleanse" the country. That is NOT why I don't eat there. My ex-husband's uncle lives next door to the owner. He called Immigration on them. (They also own a restaurant chain in Georgia). He was very vocal and honest that it was him. He said if they were "real Americans" they should be proud to prove it. My reasons are personal.

I like that, Zac! Usually people just believe what they are spoon fed. It's better to look up at least 4 different studies/sources and read them. (you'll know it's a "source" when it's in PDF format an has footnotes and/or references listed that you can easily access and see where the source got the original data ;)

You're right we don't always agree, but I let you say your piece and I say mine. In a dignified manner. And my views are all "individual" to say the least. I get many posts from the Right on my feed and also from far left. But the ones I argue with the most are the pro-choice ones. As the daughter of a scientist, I grew up looking at cells through a microscope. No one can tell me that if we found a microorganism on another planet, it wouldn't be a world wide headline, "We found life on another planet!!" If a microorganism on another planet is life, so is one, growing at a faster pace than any other organism, growing in a woman's uterus! Whew :) That's nice to get out of system on a thread where I know I won't be the only one who thinks that way. And it's due to faith AND science.

‎421 species have the homosexual gene somewhere in their genome (possibly) It is in the human genome and had been there all along. The fallacy with comparing the human genome (mapped DNA) to a frog is that the only thing we have on common is the lower part of the brain (that is a pure reflex response w/I cognition). We have a very high functioning upper part of the brain (the frontal cortex) that allows for thought, logic, societal norms and mores. That is to say humans have a higher capacity to subjugate their biology (due to expectations by society) and live as they are expected to.

‎@Sarah, thanks for clearing that up. I meant to go to the lengths of explaining how environmental factors trigger certain "dormant" markers in your DNA...like Autism...many have the marker for it, but it takes certain environmental factors to trigger it.

In response to a photo supporting Chik-Fil-A's anti-LBGT stance:

You are smarter than that, Matt. The Old Testament also condemns eating shellfish and pork, women wearing pants and going outside of their home while they are menstruating (as they are "unclean"), wearing gold, braiding your hair, wearing polyester or other blended fabrics...this list could go on forever. I prefer to look to the Gospels. I have combed Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and have found nothing Jesus said regarding homosexuality. I am definitely not the offspring of God, but I have lived 33 years also, and I have voiced my opinion on just about everything. I would think that Jesus, knowing His fate, would have done the same.

More rants to come...my son wants access to Netflix....

Eight Reasons to Leave the 14th Amendment Alone

There is nothing sadder than watching a political party turn itself inside out and violate its principles.

A coalition of Republican state legislators are doing just that by attempting to change the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment -- or at least how it is interpreted -- to deny citizenship to the U.S. children of illegal immigrants.

At issue, this smidgen of "subversive" language:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside."

-- 14th Amendment, Section 1

That is pretty cut and dried, unless you have an interest in clouding the issue for the sake of politics.



Immigration foes target baby citizens

Latinos targeted, again?

2010: 14th Amendment rewards immigrants?

Should birth grant citizenship? RELATED TOPICS
Immigration Policy
Illegal Immigration and Deportation
Fourteenth Amendment
Citizenship and Naturalization
Which brings us to State Legislators for Legal Immigration. Representing members from 40 states, this outfit is taking aim at what it calls "anchor babies." This week, some of the leaders revealed their strategy at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington.

They propose two things: legislation to create a new definition of state citizenship, apart from U.S. citizenship, that excludes the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, and an agreement between the states to issue different birth certificates to babies whose parents cannot prove legal status.

This entire crusade is an immoral, illogical and ill-conceived maneuver that will further divide the American people and ultimately destroy the Republican Party.

And here are eight reasons why:

• 1. There's a reason why the majority of Republicans in Congress wisely steered clear of this issue in 1999 and again in 2005 when it was proposed by Reps. Brian Bilbray, R-California, and Nathan Deal, R-Georgia, respectively. (Deal will soon become Georgia's governor.) In this country, we don't visit the sins of the parent onto the child. And it's unseemly for the GOP to be seen as attacking children whose only "sin" is having the temerity to be born on U.S. soil.

• 2. What part of "legal" and "U.S. citizen" don't these activists understand? Some restrictionists and racists like to claim that they have no problem with legal immigrants, that their beef is solely with those who enter the country illegally or overstay a visa unlawfully. Is that so? This movement puts the lie to that claim by targeting a group of people who have every "legal" right to be here.

And normally, people like this oppose comprehensive reform because it would offer an earned pathway to citizenship. They say that this commodity is much too valuable to be bartered with. If they really believe that, then they should keep their mitts off it and show this group of U.S. citizens the proper respect.

• 3. What happened to those who usually preach the virtues of adhering to a strict interpretation of the Constitution? Apparently, that kind of "strictness" doesn't apply in this case. Ironically, many of these same people want to make English the country's official language. But shouldn't they first acquaint themselves with the English language?

• 4. One argument for this kind of legislative mischief is that it is completely permissible under "states' rights." Seriously? These folks not only skipped high school civics. They also slept though U.S. history. A state doesn't have the right to pass a law that denies residents a right protected by the U.S. Constitution. See Mississippi, circa 1960s.

• 5. There is no such thing as anchor babies. Just ask Elvira Arellano, who now resides in Mexico because she was deported in August 2007 despite having an 8-year-old son who was born in the United States. There are, however, anchor jobs gladly provided by U.S. employers, including homeowners eager to get others to do their chores. It's jobs that keep illegal immigrants "anchored" here. Stop hiring, and you'll send them on their way.

• 6. The Republican Party is planting the seeds of its own demise with this stunt. Polls show that the majority of Latinos are not in support of an open border, and they'll go along with border enforcement. But they are opposed to what they consider the radical and mean-spirited idea of stripping citizenship away from children. With an estimated 60 million Latinos in the country, the GOP should pick a different fight.

• 7. I have long suspected that the secret agenda is to spare Republicans the electoral spanking they richly deserve. It may be that the concern here isn't U.S. citizenship per se, but something that comes with it: the right to vote. Republicans know that once these U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants come of age, they're likely to remember how Mommy and Daddy were treated and pay it back, voting against every Republican on the ballot -- unless they don't have the right to vote. And if this is true, what happened to that time-honored GOP rhetoric about people taking responsibility for their actions? There isn't much of that here if Republicans are indeed scheming to dodge accountability and avoid paying a political price for bashing immigrants.

• 8. It is often said that the United States is one of the few developed nations in the world that affords citizenship rights to anyone born on its soil. That is something we should feel proud of. It's one of the reasons the United States remains an exceptional nation, one of the most productive countries, the one remaining superpower, and an inspiration around the globe.

The U.S. immigration system isn't perfect, but this country handles immigration better than any other on Earth.

Let's keep it that way. Let's keep ignorance and prejudice at bay. And keep the 14th Amendment just the way it is.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ruben Navarrette Jr.

DREAM Act Failure and Reaction from American Immigration Lawyers Association

Senate fails to pass DREAM Act

On Saturday morning, the Senate failed to advance the DREAM Act (H.R. 5281) on a vote of 55-41 . Sixty votes were needed to move the bill forward procedurally and stop any filibuster. With that loss, our fight for the DREAM Act is over, at least for this Congress. Our president, David Leopold, said : “It was sad to see some U.S. Senators putting politics before principles to vote no on cloture, thereby attaching their names to the wrong side of history.”>> Watch David Leopold's full reaction to the Senate's failed vote .

The vote tally in support of DREAM included three Republicans who crossed the aisle to join 50 Democrats and 2 Independents. Those three Rs were: Richard Lugar (IN) and Robert Bennett (UT) who had come out in support long ago and Lisa Murkowski (AK) who started signaling this week that she would vote “yes”. With their yes votes, DREAM maintained its status as a bi-partisan bill dating back nine years to when it was first introduced with seven Republican co-sponsors. Today, long-time DREAM champion Orrin Hatch (R-UT) failed even to show for the bill he originally sponsored in August 2001.

Unfortunately the gain of three Republicans today was not enough to make up the difference. Combined there are 58 Democrats and Independents in the Senate, and there are 42 Republicans. If all the Ds and Is voted in favor, only two Rs would have been needed to reach 60. But today 5 Democrats voted against DREAM: Baucus (MT); Hagan (NC); Nelson (NE); Pryor (AR); and Tester (MT). And one Democrat, newly elected Joe Manchin (WV) failed to show. To win on “cloture” 60 votes were needed no matter how many actually voted. Thus, a no-show counted as a “no” vote.

As the 111th Congress comes to its sputtering halt, at least on immigration, the question many are asking is whether there will be a real opportunity to bring up DREAM in the 112th. Looking forward, we face at least two enormous legislative challenges: First, the House will shift to Republican control with 242 Rs and 193 Ds. Last week the House passed DREAM on a 218-198 vote—you can bet your house we won’t muster a strong showing like that, let alone a majority, when the new session starts. Second, in the Senate, the Democrats will still have the majority but their margin of control will be 53-47 so getting the “yes” votes will also be harder in that chamber.

For me the source of continued inspiration has been to see all the DREAM activists walking the halls of the capitol and showing tremendous courage when they are the ones who have everything at risk. Before the vote, David Leopold and I accompanied his client, Bernard Pastor, whom ICE was about to deport just two days ago but for incredible advocacy on David’s part and that of many others. We visited Senator Voinovich and waited outside his office until he came in at 9:30. Voinovich disappointed us -as did many of his colleagues- but Bernard remained hopeful as we headed to the Hill for the vote.

After the vote, all the Dreamers who watched from the Senate gallery came filing out, many with tears in their eyes. About 50 of them huddled together, said a prayer then chanted “We want the Dream Act and we want it now”. Then in Spanish: “Obama, Escucha, Estamos en La Lucha!”

Now more than ever we need and want the DREAM Act. In the new Congress an even tougher fight will be on. As we struggle to advocate on behalf of our clients and for broader reform, we will be able to keep on fighting knowing they are in the fight with us.

Greg Chen

Director of Advocacy

A Modern Take on Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol"

From “A Christmas Carol” by Charles Dickens

Men seeking donations for the poor: “At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge, it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the poor and the destitute. Many thousands are in want of common comfort, Sir.”

Scrooge: “Are there no prisons? And union workhouses are they still in operation?”

Men: “At this festive season, a few of us are endeavoring to raise a fund to buy the poor some meat and drink and means of warmth.”

Scrooge: “I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I support the establishments I have mentioned, and those who are badly off must go there.”

Men: “Many cannot go there. And, frankly, many would rather die.”

Scrooge: “Then they had better do it and decrease the surplus population.”

My Take: Maybe it’s just me, but does anyone else think that the GOP is just a bunch of Scrooges. They really would rather let the poor starve and die…yet they cling to being superior Christians. Christ made all of his disciples give away all their material possessions to follow him.

The Gospel according to Matthew 5:3-10

• Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
• Blessed are the meek: for they shall possess the land.
• Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted.
• Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill.
• Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
• Blessed are the clean of heart: for they shall see God.
• Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
• Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

These are the eight beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mount. When I interpret this reading, I believe that peacemakers (verse 9)are those that seek to end war and conflict here on earth (UNLIKE the war mongers of US Congress) I also read that those who suffer persecution for justice’ sake are the GLBT community and Immigrants who only seek equality and human rights (verse 10). I read the meek as the single mother who works in a restaurant and has food stamps and Medicaid to care for her children (verse 4). Lastly I believe that if Jesus were to take a stand on Political Issues, he would be a “Bleeding Heart Liberal.” (Pun intended).

Senator Bernie Sanders Filibuster Speech via CSPAN 2

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SenateSession4656

Please watch. This is what representing the people should like.