On the September 23 edition of her radio program, ABC News contributor Laura Ingraham mocked José Díaz-Balart for conducting a bilingual interview with María Cruz Ramírez on his MSNBC show. Ingraham said, "I can’t even follow what he’s saying because it’s so herky-jerky. Are we sure he’s a native Spanish speaker?"
Díaz-Balart responded on the September 26 edition of the Telemundo show Un Nuevo Día, saying, “It happens to many people everywhere, all the time. But you know what? We are here to contribute. To take our families forward. To contribute to this country.”
Translation by Miguel Ferrer
In the same interview with Sandy Rios today in which he warned of a looming Civil-War-level crisis in the U.S. and reported of the imminent Christian conversion of Israel’s Jews, retired Army general and Family Research Council vice president Jerry Boykin wondered why “cowardly” American Christians aren’t brave like the terrorists of ISIS.
“Think about this, what if we had Christians that were that committed to what they believe?” he said, after Rios played him a clip of a Vice interview with an ISIS spokesman. “I mean, here’s a guy who stands up and says, ‘I’m willing to die, I’m willing to die for it.’ And what about the Christian church these days? We’ve got Christians that are more cowardly than, I think, at any time in the history of America because they won’t stand up to evil.”
He went on to claim that “much” of the Islamist extremism in the United States “has come across our southern border” or “has been just developed inside by those people that came across our southern border with nefarious intent to destroy us.”
Boykin made the remarks in a live interview at the Values Voter Summit, which is hosted by his employer the Family Research Council.
h/t: Miranda Blue at RWW
Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst lost his re-election bid in the GOP primary because he was seen as too liberal, and before that he lost to Ted Cruz in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate.
Well, Dewhurst unleashed several conservative talking points today at the Values Voters Summit, where he followed Cruz by preaching against abortion rights and stirring up opposition to immigration reform. Dewhurst said President Obama “literally opened up the red carpet” for a “tsunami of unaccompanied children” with an immigration law signed in 2008, the year before Obama became president.
“If we don’t stop the bad guys at the border, they’re going to be in your hometown tomorrow,” he said.
He later claimed that prayer rugs found in Texas are proof that ISIS members may be crossing the southern border to “mobilize terrorist Islam against the United States.” We wonder if Dewhurst is referring to the Breitbart News story which confused a prayer rug with an Adidas jersey.
h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW
Laura Ingraham unloads on MSNBC host José Díaz-Balart in xenophobic rant [TW: Xenophobia, Ethnocentrism, Hate Speech, Hispanophobia, Mexiphobia, Anti-Immigrant Bigotry]
Right-wing radio host and anti-immigration crusader Laura Ingraham launched a tirade Tuesday against MSNBC host José Díaz-Balart, mocking Díaz-Balart for translating his interview with an unauthorized immigrant and calling it “annoying” that he pronounced the woman’s name in a Spanish accent.
On Monday, Díaz-Balart invited María Cruz Ramírez, a mother of three children from Mexico, to discuss immigration reform. Díaz-Balart translated Cruz Ramírez’s answers into English, drawing Ingraham’s ire.
“First of all, I can’t even understand what he’s saying because it’s so herky-jerky,” she said. “Are we sure even he’s a native Spanish speaker at this point?”
Ingraham also inveighed against calling undocumented youth “dreamers.”
“If you’re an American kid growing up in Ohio – maybe you’re from Akron – can they call you a ‘dreamer’ on TV – or just the kids who are here illegally?” Ingraham asked.
Ingraham has used her platform on conservative talk radio to denounce immigration reform, and played a pivotal role earlier this summer in toppling then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a GOP primary for his alleged heresy on the issue.
Listen to Ingraham’s latest rant below, courtesy of Media Matters:
Luke Brinker is Salon’s deputy politics editor. Follow him on Twitter at @LukeBrinker.
WorldNetDaily columnist Gina Loudon is promoting her book “What Women Really Want” by arguing today that Republicans should be “giddy” about the prospect of running against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race.
She calls on GOP politicians to attack Clinton for supposedly tolerating rape and other forms of violence against women: "If she stood passive while Islamic women were raped and stoned to death, what will she passively let happen to women were she president of the United States?"
Loudon goes on to claim that immigration reform and gun policy reform are part of the real “war on women.”The first war is one where women are being serially gang-raped and stoned to death by Islamists across the world who believe women are only one-fifth of a person. If a woman is raped, under Shariah law, five men must testify that they witnessed the woman being raped. Otherwise, she is stoned to death in front of her friends and family. Christian and Jewish women are being led like lambs to slaughter by Islamists. There is definitely a war on women, but not the one the statist elites in D.C. like to pretend is happening. That is but a ruse designed to distract the simple minded.
Where are the old-school feminists who cussed conservative icons like Phyllis Schlafly and burned their bras in protest of equal pay, in the face of this bloody war on women? Do equal rights not to be stoned matter less than equal pay or birth control?
Where is Hillary on this? If I were GOP leadership, I would be giddy about the thought of a Hillary run. Aside from Benghazi, think about a campaign based on what she never did to stop the real war on women. If she stood passive while Islamic women were raped and stoned to death, what will she passively let happen to women were she president of the United States?
Women with whom we spoke on our book tour are most concerned with safety and security, and that is because of failed foreign policy and open borders exacted on them by the pro-old-feminist administration (including old feminists like Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, etc.). Economic security and national security are of grave concern to women today. Open borders give away jobs, especially starter jobs for youth. Open borders let terrorists in our country, and that threatens women’s families and futures. Open borders mean children with unknown, untreatable and, in some cases, latent diseases sit in classrooms with our children.
Even for those women who don’t care to ever touch a gun (and that is OK), most still wouldn’t want to take away the rights of other moms to protect their children, their families from abusers, or their homes from tyranny.
h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW
Federal, state, and local law enforcement assembled at the border bridges in Cameron County, Texas Saturday in preparation for a planned protest by something calling itself ‘The American Patriots.’ However, only five demonstrators actually showed up to face the armored car, command center and SWAT team:
"We paid people over-time," Cameron County Sheriff Omar Lucio.
When asked about having to deploy all those personnel, Lucio said, “Yes, I hate to waste that kind of money. As law enforcement, you never know what’s going to come up. You use these resources and other resources. We take care of people in the U.S.”
‘Patriot’ websites and message boards lit up with the cancellation in the wee hours of Saturday morning. A story circulated that threats from Mexican cartels were responsible for the cancellation, but it was the second time that ‘border protest’ organizers have tried this exact same excuse to explain a failed protest. This time, they couldn’t convince Ildefonso Ortiz at Breitbart.com to report it credulously.
I’ve seen a lot of ignorant fearmongering over at Faux “news” in the issue of immigration, border security and whether or not members of ISIS might decide to cross our southern border that the Republicans are constantly complaining isn’t secure enough to suit them, but this one from this Saturday’s Bulls & Bears takes the cake.
Tracy Byrnes, who is one of the regular panel members on that show actually managed to make one of the other regulars, Gary B. Smith, sound almost sane in comparison with this unhinged rant about how ISIS members are supposedly going to train the children who have been fleeing the violence in Central America to come to the United States. Apparently after first becoming mooching welfare queens, the children will do the bidding of their ISIS terrorist masters and kill all of us because they’re going to be taught to hate Americans.
From the 09.20.2014 edition of FNC’s Bulls and Bears:
Where do Republicans find these people, and why won’t they stop? The latest candidate to sign up for the hard-fought America’s Dumbest Congressman competition is…
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is the latest anti-immigrant Republican to claim, with absolutely no evidence, that undocumented immigrants could be sneaking across the southern border carrying Ebola, a disease that is currently contained in a handful of countries in West Africa.
Roll Call reports that Gingrich and Tom DeLay, who served alongside him as majority whip, fielded questions about immigration at a reunion last night for members of the House GOP class of 1994:
Gingrich and DeLay also fielded questions about immigration policy, though neither acknowledged the growing realization among many of their peers that if the GOP doesn’t take some affirmative stance on the issue in the next two years, they could pay for it at the polls in 2016.
Gingrich said a porous border meant undocumented individuals could come into the United States carrying Ebola. Wicker piped in that if Congress were ever to try again to pass a comprehensive immigration overhaul legislation, it would have to be piecemeal, and the very first bill — a border security bill — would need to be signed into law by the president before lawmakers did anything else.
DeLay said that he didn’t support “amnesty,” per se, but did think the GOP needed to do “some sort of visa reform” to allow immigrants to “come and work honestly” in the country.
The Ebola claim is just the most extreme manifestation of the anti-immigrant movement’s baseless attempts to link undocumented immigrants — particularly the wave of children fleeing violence in Central America — to disease, an age-old strategy meant to stir up anti-immigrant hysteria.
H/T: Miranda Blue at RWW
[Cross-posted at Hatewatch.]
A self-described coalition of antigovernment groups is hoping to organize yet another attempt at shutting down the U.S.-Mexico border at major commercial crossings this weekend, calling the event “Shut Down All Ports of Entry”.
Previous attempts at shutting down traffic at key border crossings this spring have ended in spectacular failure—notably radio host Pete Santilli’s attempt to shut down the crossing in Tijuana with bikers, as well as the “Border Convoy” last month, which culminated in a only a brief interruption at Brownsville, Texas.
But this particular attempt, scheduled to take place Saturday, has set off warnings among law enforcement personnel, including a local sheriff’s office in Texas and Border Patrol officials, who say they are prepared for just such an attempt.
Conservative talk show host Michael Savage said yesterday that Congress should impeach President Obama over his handling of unaccompanied minors crossing the southern border, saying that the president wants America to be “invaded by Third Worlders who are diseased.”
Savage said Obama is deliberately “dumping these children” in the U.S. so they can bring exotic diseases that will “wipe out” Americans.
As we have noted, there is absolutely no evidence of a connection between the Central American children and an outbreak of a respiratory illness in the Midwest.
Of course, Savage insists that he is “just asking the question” whether “Obama’s dumping of illegal aliens into America” led to an outbreak of disease.
“I can’t prove it,” he noted, before ranting against the “Stalinists” at the CDC who don’t believe his conspiracy theory.
h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW
Far-right legal activist Larry Klayman believes that, like it or not, America must “pursue and finish” a “holy war” against Islam, one that must start with the U.S. ending Muslim immigration and deporting Muslim-Americans because “they have no business in our land.”
Writing in WorldNetDaily last week, Klayman warned that President Obama and administration officials are not only launching a “race war” but are also “bent on furthering an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East and around the globe,” while Muslim-Americans “silently cheer events like September 11, or the beheading of American journalists.”
Klayman added that it’s “time not to let any more of Obama’s Islamic brothers into this country” and for the “Islamic traitor” Obama to be removed from office.The time for political correctness is over. It is time to call it like it is. The nation hangs in the balance, and making excuses for the destructive conduct of President Barack Hussein Obama and his American Muslim constituency no longer cuts it. His acts are not the result of someone who is ill-prepared and disconnected from the office of the president. He and his racist, anti-white, socialist, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian minions – from Attorney General Eric Holder, to Secretary of State John Kerry, to closet Muslim Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan – know exactly what they are doing. To complement the race war Obama and Holder have stoked at home, Obama and Brennan are bent on furthering an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East and around the globe. These are evil men, bent on taking the United States and its allies down. For Obama’s part, he not only identifies with his Muslim roots, he acts on them. Brennan is simply the white stooge who, among others, helps Obama carry out the plan.
I am tired of hearing pundits make excuses for Obama. And I am tired of hearing Obama make excuses for Islam and his Muslim brothers who either participate in acts against the nation and our people, or who remain silent to the terror Islam has wrought on the world. The hardcore truth is that we are in a religious war, not of our making but for which we must confront and win. And, this is nothing new. For over 1,400 years, Muslims have, with a few exceptions, been trying and succeeding at killing Jews and Christians. But as of today, the situation has worsened. While Muslims have thus far not succeeded in wiping us off the face of the earth, much less exterminating Israel – the land of Jesus and Moses – the bottom line is that most of them hate our guts. This helps explain the stony silence of the overwhelming hordes of Islamic leaders and their flock who even in this country sit back, partake of our riches, but do little to nothing to join our society and practice American values, rather than support in direct or latent ways the death or destruction that has become so acute, as furthered by their ilk.
If American Muslims had tried to play a constructive role with their terrorist brothers, that would be one thing. But by and large they sit back and silently cheer events like September 11, or the beheading of American journalists. Encouraged to stay silent by the likes of Barack Hussein Obama, who at every step of his presidency makes excuses for his Islam – the latest being that the beheading of these journalists does not represent Muslim theology – American Muslims have largely acted, and not acted, in ways that unmask their lack of real connection to the nation our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us.
It is thus time not only to revoke the passports and citizenship of these American Muslim traitors who have joined ISIS and other terrorist groups, but also to stop any further Muslim immigration to our shores, unless there are proven and legitimate family or humanitarian reasons for entry.
These immigrating Muslims have no constitutional rights to be or remain here! Let them be forced to return and remain in the lands they hold dear, where maiming and killing is a way of life and where all “infidels,” according to their Shariah law, are to be dealt with harshly. They have no business in our land!
We the People did not ask for a “holy war,” but it is time we pursue and finish it.
We have to put our foot down and do everything we can to legally remove this Islamic traitor from the presidency. It is also time not to let any more of Obama’s Islamic brothers into this country. To do so would be potentially suicidal in today’s increasingly hostile and bloodthirsty anti-Judeo-Christian Muslim world, which Barack Hussein Obama has furthered in words and deed.
h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW
Immigration advocates were working with community members on how the coming executive actions would affect them. Now, stunned activists are scrambling to figure out next steps in the coming weeks.
Stunned immigration activists lashed out Saturday at the Obama administration over the White House decision to delay executive actions on deportations until after the election. But beyond anger, the decision has left activists scrambling to figure out what to do next.
Activists BuzzFeed News spoke with said they will spend the weekend ironing out specifics on how they will escalate against an administration and vulnerable Democrats who they feel are taking the Latino and immigrant community for granted.
“We feel very intensely that that these decisions that are made affect people’s lives,” said Lorella Praeli, director of advocacy and policy at immigrant rights organization United We Dream (UWD), while at a UWD retreat to decide how the group will respond. “People were saying, ‘now I have to talk to my mom, now I have to tell my dad.’ That’s what drives our work. This is clearly a political move and politics over families again.”
“It makes me really upset — we had a forum with the moms and parents to prepare them for these actions,” DREAMer Erika Andiola said. “Now it’s not gonna happen and some of them have to go to court. It makes me so angry that he’s fully throwing Latinos under the bus.”
“The midterm elections were on the calendar back in June,” said Marielena Hincapié, the executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, noting that she thought the administration had made the political calculation that the benefits outweighed the costs.
Between now and November, “tens of thousands who could have been protected will be deported and more kids will end up in foster care because their parent was deported,” she said. “These politicians are not paying attention to the humanity.”
In the hours after the delay was announced, many immigration activists expressed similar feelings of anger and betrayal — but they wouldn’t say Obama and the Democrats are on their own.
Part of the tension for immigrant groups, Hincapié acknowledged, is that they want to punish Democrats and the administration for yet another disappointment but they know that Republican control of the Senate would be far worse for the vulnerable population they advocate for.
“We’re angry at the Democrats, but the Republicans are dead to us,” Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, said. “The Republicans blocked the best chance at immigration reform in a generation.”
Hincapié doubled down on her belief that Democrats made a mess of the entire process.
“I can see the GOP being so happy, ‘Here go the Democrats screwing it up again.’ There’s a discipline on the GOP side in the way there isn’t on the Democratic side, where there is no backbone or a real clarity of focus,” she said.
“There’s no one answer because none of these Latino groups are going to act the same,” Angela Marie Kelley, Vice President for Immigration Policy at the Center for American Progress, said when asked what immigration groups will do next. “I do think things will cool down enough so people can look at broader political issues again.”
The reality for Latino activists facing the November ballot is that Republicans aren’t an alternative, even after Obama’s betrayal, Kelley said. That means if they want to show they have political influence, they have to help the Senate Democrats who just successfully convinced the White House to delay the executive actions to win on Election Day.
“If you look at which parties are the obstructionists [to immigration reform]…the bad guys here are not the Democrats,” she said. “That said, I don’t know that there won’t be some constituencies that will be angry and won’t get beyond that. But I think most groups will come back to the table. You know, it’s not powerful to not vote.”
Top officials at SEIU, the union that has made the push for immigration changes a central part of its activism agenda, released a joint statement Saturday saying they were “deeply disheartened” by the White House delay. But they turned that disappointment in Obama into a rallying cry for votes for Democrats in the same statement.
“By far, this isn’t the end game. Immigration reform has and always will be our future. While the president will continue to hear from us, Congress will feel the pressure of a growing electorate,” the statement read. “We haven’t forgotten how we first got here. Republicans failed the American people by refusing to vote on meaningful immigration reform. Holding them accountable in November is a promise that we intend to keep.”
Still, the advocates also believe there will be greater unity of purpose after Saturday’s announcement.
In a last ditch effort Friday night, 183 organizations representing labor, faith, legal and advocacy organizations sent a letter to the president asking him not to delay his administrative actions.
Activists also point to the confirmation hearing for the next Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director, which could happen before the election, as something that could see protests and signal the next battleground between Republicans and supporters of changed enforcement priorities.
The National Hispanic Leadership Agenda (NHLA), a coalition of 39 of the top Latino organizations in the country, said that because 97% of those deported are Latino, separations due to deportation policy are hitting Latino families particularly hard.
Because of this, NHLA announced that it would endorse a national boycott of meetings with the President on immigration matters if they do not include representatives of undocumented immigrants, it said in a press release.
NHLA includes top Latino organizations like NCLR and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and their decision means the administration would likely consider inviting more undocumented immigrants to it’s meetings.
Janet Murguía, president of the National Council of La Raza, was deeply critical of the White House delay, saying it felt to her like Obama was taking Latino voters for granted. She said rallying those voters in November would be tougher post-delay.
“We have to see how this decision will translate in the next three or four weeks,” she said. “It will make our overall efforts challenging, but we are vested in politically empowering our community.”
For Praeli, fears by Democrats of losing the Senate have been around for months and undocumented immigrants are just being made into a scapegoat.
She said the president, who is so concerned with his legacy and being seen as the “champion-in-chief” of immigration reform and not the “deporter-in-chief,” will have to go further to get right with the community.
“I would say that the bar of success is higher for the administration now more than ever,” Praeli said.
“If and when he comes through on this promise they should know that they can not just help a couple million people. He has a lot to come back from and a lot to make up for.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — Abandoning his pledge to act by the end of summer, President Barack Obama has decided to delay any executive action on immigration until after the November congressional elections, White House officials said.
The move instantly infuriated immigration advocates while offering relief to some vulnerable Democrats in tough Senate re-election contests.
Two White House officials said Obama concluded that circumventing Congress through executive actions on immigration during the campaign would politicize the issue and hurt future efforts to pass a broad overhaul.
The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the president’s decision before it was announced, said Obama made his decision Friday as he returned to Washington from a NATO summit in Wales.
They said Obama called a few allies from Air Force One to inform them of his decision, and that the president made more calls from the White House on Saturday.
The officials said Obama had no specific timeline to act, but that he still would take his executive steps before the end of the year.
In a Rose Garden speech on June 30, Obama said he had directed Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Attorney General Eric Holder to give him recommendations for executive action by the end of summer. Obama also pledged to “adopt those recommendations without further delay.”
Obama faced competing pressures from immigration advocacy groups that wanted prompt action and from Democrats worried that acting now would energize Republican opposition against vulnerable Senate Democrats. Among those considered most at risk were Democratic Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Kay Hagan of North Carolina.
Obama advisers were not convinced that any presidential action would affect the elections. But the officials said the discussions around timing grew more pronounced within the past few weeks.
Ultimately, the advisers drew a lesson from 1994 when Democratic losses were blamed on votes for gun-control legislation, undermining any interest in passing future gun measures.
White House officials said aides realized that if Obama’s immigration action was deemed responsible for Democratic losses this year, it could hurt any attempt to pass a broad overhaul later on.
Immigration advocates blasted Obama and Senate Democrats over the decision, saying both have shown a lack of political will.
"We are bitterly disappointed in the president and we are bitterly disappointed in the Senate Democrats," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice. "We advocates didn’t make the reform promise; we just made the mistake of believing it. The president and Senate Democrats have chosen politics over people, the status quo over solving real problems."
Cristina Jimenez, managing director of United We Dream, said the decision was “another slap to the face of the Latino and immigrant community.”
"Where we have demanded leadership and courage from both Democrats and the president, we’ve received nothing but broken promises and a lack of political backbone," she said.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Obama’s move amounted to “Washington politics at its worst.”
"What’s so cynical about today’s immigration announcement is that the president isn’t saying he’ll follow the law, he’s just saying he’ll go around the law once it’s too late for Americans to hold his party accountable in the November elections," McConnell said. "This is clearly not decision-making designed around the best policy."
Partisan fighting erupted recently over how to address the increased flow of unaccompanied minors from Central America at the U.S. border with Mexico. The officials said the White House had not envisioned such a battle when Obama made his pledge June 30.
Obama asked for $3.7 billion to address the border crisis. The Republican-controlled House, however, passed a measure that only gave Obama a fraction of what he sought and made it easier to deport the young migrants arriving at the border, a provision opposed by Democrats and immigration advocates. In the end, Congress adjourned without a final bill.
The number of minors caught alone illegally crossing the Mexican border into the United States has been declining since June. That decrease and Congress’ absence from Washington during August has taken attention away from the border for now.
Still, the dispute over how to deal with the surge of Central American border crossers threatened to spill over into the larger debate over immigration and the fate of 11 million immigrants in the United States who either entered illegally or overstayed their visas and have been in the U.S. for some time.
The Democratic-led Senate last year passed a broad overhaul of immigration that boosted border security, increased visas for legal immigrants and a provided a path to citizenship for immigrants illegally in the country.
But the Republican-controlled House balked at acting on any broad measure and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, informed Obama earlier this year that the House would not act in 2014. That led Obama to declare he would act on his own.
During a news conference Friday in Wales, Obama reiterated his determination to act on his own even as he avoided making a commitment on timing. He also spelled out ambitious objectives for his executive actions.
Obama said that without legislation from Congress, he would take steps to increase border security, upgrade the processing of border crossers and encourage legal immigration. He also said he would offer immigrants who have been illegally in the United States for some time a way to become legal residents, pay taxes, pay a fine and learn English.
"I want to be very clear: My intention is, in the absence of … action by Congress, I’m going to do what I can do within the legal constraints of my office, because it’s the right thing to do for the country," he said.
The extent of Obama’s authority is a matter of debate among legal experts and in Congress. Some Democrats say it would be best for Obama to let Congress act.