The anti-immigrant movement has descended into madness. I know this because I have a relative who sends me the occasional anti-immigrant email. He knows I have a daily article here on SG and wants to keep me informed of the scary immigrant activities taking place in America. Previously he sent me an article on the NAFTA Superhighway. Upon further research I discovered that the Superhighway is entirely fictional.

The emails are flying back and forth between the anti-immigrant folks and they are scaring the shit out of each other. The latest one that came into my inbox has been forward to hundreds of people in the anti-immigrant revolution. They apparently believe it is real. I, on the other hand, thought it was completely insane and much like the NAFTA Superhighway, entirely fictional. The email is a real work of art.

At this point, I believe this could be a real interview. Juan came over, looking for work with some friends and now he is feeling the power one feels when involved in a large protest. Pretty standard stuff. Then the wheels come off.

Wow. Juan suddenly started talking in right wing rhetoric bursts. He seems to have quite a bit of knowledge about how to scam the American system – and is even excited about getting Social Security. Sadly, he has no access to Social Security because he has no Social Security number. But why shouldn’t he be excited? He is actually right in the middle of transforming from a human being into a cartoon villain.

And note that Juan called his own children "Mexican children." That is what people do. In America, when we talk about our children, we say, "Have you met my American child, Billy?"

Ha ha. Cartoon Juan, now you are speaking in classic joke form. That is weird, but VERY common among Mexicans.

Holy shit. Seriously? This is the best you have, you right wing lunatics? That joke was so bad it made me what to punch myself in the face for reading it.

Ah, yes. This is something that really enraged the anti-immigrant crowd. When immigrant rallies were held across the country, many in the crowd carried Mexican flags. It was outrageous! I haven’t seen anything like it since the St. Patrick’s Day parade in New York, with all those fucking Irish flags! Hey Paddy, it’s America, not Ireland!

Sigh. At this point you just have to become sad for anyone who actually thinks this dialogue is real. Yes, the Mexicans want their land back. They don’t want to just make a living wage and support their families. They are not concerned with making enough money to survive the month, but rather reclaiming land that was lost over a century ago. I can’t tell you how many conversations I have had with Mexicans about the reclamation of Southern California. Our situation is very similar to the Israeli – Palestinian conflict and the Balkan states of the former Yugoslavia.

Cartoon Juan just needed to hit the free schools and welfare points again before he wrapped it up, just in case the reader had forgotten.

Jim is obviously an unbiased reporter who takes his job seriously and argues with people in the street, rather than simply presenting their viewpoint. And Juan, God bless him, is only after the free things here in America. He certainly doesn't want to work. You never see a Mexican immigrant looking for work. And in addition, Juan is looking forward to some sort of revolution. What he does not care about is making enough money to survive. He is a cartoon that the anti-immigrant crowd believes is real.

Juan is what I like to call the mythical Mexican. They have created him out of fictional stories, far-away observations, rumors and paste. Fake Juan is quite scary because he wants to destroy our country. The Mexican villain taps into every fear artery that Americans care about. They include healthcare, schools, welfare, crime, sovereignty and even baby kidnapping. He is the ultimate example of the La Raza demon. At the end of the email, they request that we take action:

And they are passing it on. This email is being sent around the country to enraged citizens. Some of these people actually believe that La Raza is a revolutionary group that is planning a civil war in 2008, right here in Southern California.

Ethnic cleansing. Yes, white Americans are speaking of ethic cleansing without a hint of irony. The information highway is here, feel the pride.

Remember way back in 2004, when everyone from Hunter S. Thompson to that annoying dude who fucked up “Kashmir” were urging Americans to vote?

Zoila Meyer, a single mother of four living in Adelanto, California, was one of over 122 million Americans who hopped on the representative democracy bandwagon that year. In fact, she took it a step further. Not only did she register to vote, she decided to run for Adelanto’s City Council, filing her candidacy papers only 10 days before the deadline.

She never expected to actually win a seat on the City Council, so in true American underdog tradition, Zolia wound up winning the election.

Her electoral victory must have surprised someone else as well, since shortly thereafter one of her family members went to the authorities and got to snitchin’.

Zolia, who was originally born in Cuba and had been living in the United States since the age of one, might not actually be a US citizen. She just assumed she was a citizen, as many people who have been living in the United States since before they could talk might tend to do. This meant that when she cast her vote in the 2004 election, she was actually committing a felony.

Facing criminal charges, Zolia resigned from the Adelanto City Council only 10 weeks after taking office. She then applied to become a naturalized citizen, and struck a deal with the government. In 2006, Zolia pled guilty to the misdemeanor charge of “fraudulent voting,” paid a fine, and got probation. The fine citizens of Adelanto were thus spared having such a flagrant lawbreaker in their city government. Well, until the mayor and his wife were busted for stealing $20 grand from Little League fundraisers. Classy!

Just when you thought that was the happy ending, earlier this year the INS decided that Zolia’s guilty plea was enough reason to deport her. So now after being arrested (again), Zolia faces a court hearing in July to see if the horrible crime of voting will get her kicked out into Canada. That is, if she’s not actually an American citizen. Apparently nobody really knows if she is one or not, due to the complexity of immigration laws. At least the INS got to handcuff her and make her post bail.

I feel safer already.

The White House and some members of Congress have reached an agreement on immigration reform that would grant legal status to millions of people who have illegally crashed our party. Apparently lawmakers have been meeting secretly and only today revealed the fruit of their naughty bargaining.

The deal mandates increased border security and creates a new “Z visa,” which would put immigrants on track to get citizenship in 8 to 13 years. They would have to pay fees and a $5,000 fine and also return to their home country first. What could possibly be a problem in that scenario? Most immigrants have thousands of dollars lying around and would not at all be suspicious of leaving and coming back.

The plan would create an immigration system based on skills, education levels and job experience. The current system emphasizes family ties. Low-skilled immigrants would be forced to return home after two years in the US. They could renew their visas twice, but would have to leave for a year in between. If they wanted to become citizens they could apply for a green card under a point system.

One big reason to reject the plan is that Bush supports it. Everything he touches turns to shit and this would be no different.

Liberals and conservatives came out against the reform plan. Liberals say the proposal is unworkable and unfair, while conservatives are losing their minds over the idea of amnesty. Take a look at what the kids on the Free Republic website are saying.

Interesting idea. We're going to table it.

Nor can you trust grammar, apparently.

Note: I, FearTheReaper, hate "immagrants" too.

30-50 million is a big difference. That's a twenty million spread. I'm going to need you to pick an exact exaggeration.

I pretty sure this guy is talking about the Visogoths, in which case he should be on another forum.

Somebody whipped out the mother fucking translator! BAM!

They finally get around to talking about impeachment and it’s over immigration. Gotta love the conservatives.

In our never-ending quest to ensure that San Francisco remains ahead of Massachusetts on wingnut talk radio’s list of Evil Liberal Areas Wherein Everyone Will Soon Explode From Sheer Lack of Moral Fiber, Mayor/gay rights icon/philanderer/matinee idol/Democratic wunderkind Gavin Newsom went out of his way this weekend to let everyone know that “illegal aliens” are a-OK in the Baghdad by the Bay.

Suck it, Massholes! You may have had legal gay marriage and universal health care before us, but we’re not backing down without a fight. Oh, and we’re also banning plastic bags. I’ll bet you didn’t even think of that shit. You can take your clam chowdah and your Hahvahd Yahd and shove it.

Returning to Newsom’s announcement, the border freaks out there need not worry too much. Newsom’s pledge is both a renewal of a 1989 Board of Supervisor’s action and a statement with little legal effect. Newsom may be able to discourage federal raids on suspected undocumented immigrants San Francisco, but he can’t necessarily stop them. So why make the announcement?

Well, for one it’s good politics in an election year. Newsom is a political genius at sewing up blocks of voters who may not be his "natural" base. However, in addition to the standard election-cycle pandering, there’s a bigger reason why this issue is making news in this area: the INS have been freaking the fuck out of people lately.

But why should people be upset about being questioned by the Feds? I mean, if they’re legal then they should have nothing to hide, right?

Sounds like a party. Seeing as the INS is often set off on these raids by tips fed to them by state or local authorities, San Francisco’s policy is a reasonable one and designed to minimize this sort of blatant bullying and xenophobia. The City can’t stop the Feds from enforcing their draconian and illogical immigration policy, but that doesn’t mean we have to help them do it.

Subrosa thinks the plastic bag ban is quite silly. Really.

It finally happened. Bill O’Reilly’s head exploded today on the air. It was bound to happen, although nobody expected it to occur during an ugly exchange with Geraldo. The two met today on The Factor to discuss a drunk driving-illegal immigrant case that Bill has been pounding his chest over.

On Friday night in Virginia Beach, two teenage girls were killed when a drunk driver hit their car. The driver, Alfredo Ramos, is an illegal immigrant who had previously been arrested for driving while intoxicated. O’Reilly believes Ramos should have been deported after the first conviction and “plans on making an example out of Virginia Beach.” He is on a crusade to get the Mayor removed from office.

The Virginia Beach police chief says his officers only question immigration status when there is a felony involved, otherwise it is a federal matter. O’Reilly also said the governor is doing nothing about immigration. The governor also responded that immigration is supposed to he handled at the federal level.

The father of one of the deceased girls said O’Reilly turning this into an immigration issue “loses the focus that the girls were killed by a man that police said was driving drunk.”

So, today Geraldo came on The Factor and he had a different opinion than crazy Bill. Bill no likey when people don’t agree with him.



Okay, that is a lunatic. How much rage can one man have inside him? He seriously looks like he is going to hit Geraldo at one point. It’s called Wellbutrin, Bill.

Former Speaker of the House, habitual adulterer, general fuckwit and (naturally) possible GOP presidential candidate is at it again. You may remember Newt from the time he said this:

Or the time he vomited out this nugget of civic wisdom:

You might also remember him from that time he told his first wife he wanted a divorce while she was recovering from cancer surgery. I’m sure you remember him. Like your first venereal disease, he’s kind of hard to forget.

Well the hits, they just keep a-coming. This time, he’s trying to stir up predictable xenophobic sentiment by bashing bilingual education efforts.

Ok. For the moment, let’s set aside the extremely offensive insinuation that if you don’t speak English you’re automatically living on skid row. Instead, let us analyze his equally asinine comparison of the American history test to a ballot. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services Department publishes some sample questions on their website. For now, we'll also ignore the fact that non-English speakers who are born in this country don’t have to take this test and let’s take a gander at some of these brainteasers shall we?

Yikes. Not exactly the college boards. Also please take note that while the answers were meant to be relatively simple, short and easy, the actual questions themselves are exceptionally simple, short and easy. So while it’s true that citizenship requires you to know some basic English in the context of American history, we’re not exactly requiring you to have an advanced degree in the King's English.

So how does that compare to your typical ballot? Not quite the same simplicity. The two aren't remotely comparable in the level of English fluency required. This is, of course, where Newt's predictably simple-minded comparison predictably fails. And spectacularly so.

Ballots, ballot summaries and other official documents are printed in many languages to ensure that the decisions our citizens make are as well-informed as possible. The ability to make those informed choices should not be infringed upon simply because Newt’s got a bug up his ass about getting distracted by squiggly lines on the Mandarin ballot. It’s not just about coddling people who don’t speak English very well, it’s about making sure your electorate has all the tools necessary to vote intelligently.

Of course, if we’re voting intelligently we’re certainly not voting for Newt. So I guess it makes sense why he wouldn't be in favor of something like that.

When Subrosa was in high school, he weighed 127 pounds, had long hippie hair, listened to awful wanky guitar-rock and had a big “Newt Free Zone” sign in the back window of his gray 1980 Toyota Celica hatchback. Subrosa also never got laid in that car. Ever.

You can always count on those rascal-like College Republicans to do something offensive in a desperate attempt to get attention. This time it’s the NYU branch of daddy’s party that wants America to know they exist. And it seems to have worked.

The zany Republicans have held contest called, "Find the Illegal Immigrant." It’s a brilliant game full of strategy and intrigue in which a student poses as an immigrant by wearing a name tag, while other students pose as INS agents, also by wearing name tags. Then they try to find the immigrant! Clever, exciting and not at all retarded!

College Republicans president Sarah Chambers claims the contest was created to bring attention to the issue of illegal immigration.

I love a group that physically opens up the issue of illegal immigration, whatever the fuck that means. Open the shit out of it, you crazy College Republican.

Fuck yeah it is. Let me start. You’ve come up with an idiotic idea that will only offend the overly sensitive because you’re a dumb cunt who is totally distanced from reality. Your turn. No? Oh, I thought we were starting an intellectual debate by being stupidly offensive.

Instead of mocking the young, rich kids for their idiotic idea, other students pursued the most predictable path and took to the streets in protest! Many student groups, such as ACLU at NYU, the College Democrats and other “multicultural clubs,” came together to protest the “racist” event.

Protesters carried signs and handed out pamphlets that stated, "No one is illegal.” Really, what about murderers? Rapists? One organizer pushed for a silent protest. No idea whether or not that came off and we will probably never know.

The national news media swarmed onto NYU's campus yesterday and the story made headlines nationwide, including coverage on CNN, Fox News, NPR and talk radio.

Is it just me, or do our Congressional representatives seem to take a hell of a lot more vacation than the rest the country? In the mad dash to get something accomplished before yet another break in this year's session of Congress (and score a few political points with base voters before the midterm elections) the Senate overwhelmingly voted in favor of a bill that approves construction of a 700 mile long fence between the US and Mexico.

I'm sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the midterm elections coming up. Right. With scandals abounding, the government still expanding, federal spending on the rise, ties between the GOP leadership and Jack Abramoff still fresh on people's minds, the return of hurricane season stirring up not-so-pleasant memories of FEMA's performance during hurricane Katrina, the GOP needs to do something to convince conservatives they can get something done and are still, well conservative.

Not everyone in the Senate thinks it's the greatest idea, however.

Point well taken - that's a huge border. However, unlike some of my other progressive contemporaries, I actually don't fundamentally oppose the idea of a little more border control between the US and its neighbors. It would only seem prudent to try and at least monitor who is coming in and out of the country for security purposes, and also to try and get a better handle on just how many people pass the border each day. Plus, having the government in charge presents a better face to the rest of the world than just letting a bunch of vigilante psychos all juiced up after watching Red Dawn like the Minutemen try to pretend like they're the ones controlling the border.

However, the real problem isn't the construction of the fence, but the fact that the GOP and its candidates are virtually guaranteed to claim that having it there is a simple, band-aid solution to the very complex problem of illegal immigration. Even if the fence does limit the number of migrants crossing the border it doesn't help the farmers who depend on seasonal migrant labor who won't have enough pickers for their crops to harvest them. Nor will a fence change anything about the status of the millions of illegal immigrants currently resising in the US. Or the economic conditions abroad that offer laborers the stark choice of either not working or coming to the US illegally to find a decent, paying job.

Don't expect this Congress (or really any future ones) to realistically address any of these concerns. Projects like a giant fence are easy to point to and say they represent progress, but actual solutions take time, money and understanding that may be beyond the capacity of our nation's leaders to implement.

Judge Pro Tem Bruce R. Fink of the Los Angeles Superior Court is in trouble for simply attempting to help two wayward lovers. Aurora Gonzalez was looking for a restraining order against her husband of six years, Francisco Salgado. She claimed Salgado was "verbally and emotionally abusive" to both her and their children. Gonzalez said Salgado called her a derogatory term and threatened to call immigration authorities. The case was heard in court last week.

Luckily the case was heard by substitute Judge Bruce “Cupid” Fink. Bruce listened and knew in a heartbeat what was going on.

Clearly. Why else would she be in court seeking restraining order? Is there a better way to say, “I want you inside me?” I submit to you there is not. Fink didn’t want to grant a restraining order because it would keep them apart for almost a year. This is exactly the problem with restraining orders; they keep people apart.

Judge Fink then took the next logical step. He asked Gonzalez if she really was an illegal. She said yes. He took the appropriate action.

He never got to twenty. Fink then dismissed the case because the plaintiff was running terrified down the courthouse steps. He explained the obvious.

Thanks for giving the anti-immigrant, anti-activist judge, right wing lunatics the greatest ammunition ever. And thanks for making me believe in love again.

One of the most surprising moves taken by Bush this past year, as far as progressives could tell, was his significantly more moderate stance with respect to proposed changes in US immigration policy and enforcement of laws dealing with illegal immigrants. Bush's plan has been a "guest worker" program, along with some possibilities for amnesty for illegals currently residing in the US, provided they pass an English proficiency test. While some progressives worry that guest workers could just be legitimizing the creation of a permanent underclass, the departure from the xenophobic rhetoric that had surrounded the issue from the GOP was a refreshing change. Unfortunately for Bush, with his approval continuing to swirl down the toilet and House reps getting nervous about reelection, the more conservative wing of the party seems to have decided to tell him where he can stick his guest worker plan. It's time to start building walls!

What's the real difference here? Timing. Bush's original plan was one of those "big tent" proposals that was supposed to make everybody happy all at once; simultanously continuing the GOP courtship with the Hispanic vote while also throwing a bone or two to the militiamen who form the party's core. That idea no longer seems plausible, and apparently the party has come to the conclusion that the Hispanic vote can wait, it's time to keep the yokels happy. Here's Rep. Pence's plan in a nutshell:

Admittedly the plan does eventually allow for some form of guest worker program. But it does seem preoccupied with the border security aspect of it first and foremost. And two years is plenty of time to keep pushing back promises of any sort of amnesty or path towards citizenship - keep the carrot out there to try and entice Hispanic voters to support the plan, but no delivery is required. A disappointment for sure, but not really a surprise.

Amidst the heated national debate currenty circulating around the topic of how to deal with illegal immigration, it's nice to know that there are plenty of options to choose from, like guest worker plans, deportations, a giant wall, amnesty, and now forced labor camps. That's right, Don Goldwater, nephew of the infamous 1964 presidential candidate Barry Goldwater who advocated the use of nuclear weapons in Vietnam, is running for governor of Arizona, with a plank in his platform consisting of putting illegal immigrants to work - just not the way they'd prefer.

To be sure, Republicans are jumping down Goldwater's throat for his comments that don't really jibe with the GOP agenda that's trying so desperately to placate its newer Hispanic consitutency while still showing the tough guy image that keeps the hardliners coming to the voting booths. But Goldwater's candidacy is no joke, for someone with such a certifiably fringe position as creating "tent cities" for illegal immigrants to be put to work (curious how a mobile, unpaid labor force will be used to help preserve domestic jobs) he's the leading Republican in the race so far, though trailing behind Democratic incumbent Janet Napolitano by about 8 percentage points.

And while the rest of his platform contains some points that are more moderate and toe the party line a little more effectively, like actively prosecuting business owners who employ illegal immigrant labor and pushing municipalities to enforce laws they have on the books already about the subject, he's also a supporter of the "Minutemen" and other "civil defense forces," essentially groups of vigilantes seeking to establish border security on their own, with or without government sanction.

Future polling data following Goldwater's more public sentiments about stricter measures to be taken against illegal immigrants should be a useful measure to determine just how many people in Arizona, and possibly other border states feel similarly on this issue. While I think there is little chance that any of them will vote Democratic in the 2006 elections, Republicans still need to pay heed - an immigration policy not viewed as being decisive enough by these people could cause them not to vote at all, and that could cost them dearly in this election and in 2008. When these sorts of people make up your political base, that's the price you have to pay for not keeping them satisfied.

The issue of how best to deal with illegal immigration in the US has come to a head quickly this year, with protests on both sides (but far more, and larger demonstrations in favor of some form of amensty or path to citizenship) and politicians scrambling to figure out a solution that could either galvanize key constituencies for the midterm elections or get them tossed out of office. It's a delicate balancing act, particulatly at the national political level, where the President and Senate have to juggle the competing interests of businesses that benefit from cheap migrant worker labor, legal voters whose families contain some living illegally, those who feel as if American jobs and services are being taken by illegal immigrants, and masses of supporters on both sides of the issue. At the congressional level, however, it's a very different fight. With smaller constituencies to satisfy, congressional representatives have much more pointed agendas, particularly those who represent districts within border states, and going along with a more moderate policy of compromise may not spell reelection for them this year. On that note, congressional leaders have tabled discussion on immigration until later on this summer, with the possibility that no new legislation will be submitted before election season in the fall.

Sounds like the wind has mysteriously fallen out of the sails of those in Congress who enjoy making bold statements about immigration including endorsing sending military troops to guard the border to prevent illegals from entering. Could it be that the impending national elections are making it hard to keep those sorts of statements alive while getting Republican senators reelected or increasing support for Bush?

It's a dangerous line the house is trying to toe, and one that Democrats should take advantage of if they're smart (which means they probably won't, but that's another story for another time.) The Senate is looking for broad consensus, as is the president, in keeping with the GOPs fairly successful program to incorporate moderate and conservative hispanic voters in national elections. But that won't fly in Congress, where looking tough is the only way that many Republican border state reps have any chance of getting reelected. Democrats need to push for finishing draft legislation and a vote on this topic, and they need to keep it in the public consciousness that it is Republicans who are being obstructionists in dealing with an issue that people are clearly very concerned about, for purely political reasons.