.
.
.
Last December it seemed we’d practically beaten the immigration issue to death, so I didn’t post a piece on Obama’s Executive Order. Univision‘s Jorge Ramos had recently received a journalism award, and the OC Weekly‘s Gustavo had written “Obama should be more like Reagan, grow some cojones and grant a blanket amnesty.” This Friday the NY Times published an article titled “Jorge Ramos, Voice of Latino Voters on Univision, Sends Shiver Through G.O.P.” I’ll highlight parts of these articles.
Jorge Ramos is the “star newscaster of Hispanic TV” according to The Wall Street Journal. Time magazine included him in its list of “the 25 most influential Hispanics in the United States.” Ten years ago he was already considered the Spanish Walter Cronkite, “more incisive than Dan Rather, more charming than Peter Jennings, Mexican-born Jorge Ramos is Spanish-language television’s celebrity talking head. An anchor at Univision, the fifth most-watched television network in the United States.”
Last November he received an award for “lifetime achievement in defending press freedom,” issued by the Committee to Protect Journalists. His acceptance speech eloquently stated that…
The best of journalism happens when we side with the victims, with the most vulnerable, with those who have no rights. The best of journalism happens when we, purposely, stop pretending that we are neutral and recognize that we have a moral obligation to tell truth to power…”
His words resonate among millions of families, and his influence is credited on the high Hispanic voter turnout in the 2012 election:
“As an immigrant myself, many times I speak up for other immigrants who don’t have a voice. That’s why I told President Obama that he didn’t keep his promise on immigration and that’s why I told Speaker John Boehner, to his face, that he blocked immigration reform in the House. I think I was just doing my job. As a journalist, part of my job is to make visible the millions of immigrants who are invisible to the rest of America.”
One of the presenters of that award to Ramos was the editor of The Guardian. This prestigious newspaper had published the article by Gustavo criticizing Obama’s Executive Order on immigration reform:
“… The only group of people smiling today are my conservative Latino friends, who have already been texting me photos of the two best presidential amigos that undocumented immigrants ever had: Ronald Reagan and George W Bush…
“Reagan famously endorsed a sweeping amnesty in 1986 that helped over 3m undocumented immigrants – along with his successor, George H Bush – offered protection from deportation to children and adults who didn’t qualify for amnesty but had a family member who did. That affected another 1.5m people.
“Reagan isn’t exactly up for sainthood in the Latino community – witness his dealings in Central America – but many Latinos of my parents’ generation will always respect him because he understood that mass deportations made no sense, and that undocumented migrants deserved to participate in the American dream – and that coming into this country “the wrong way” shouldn’t stop someone from having that chance.”
On immigration, Ramos and Gustavo well represent this mainstream issue for the majority of Latinos. On other subjects they are as diverse as the people and issues. Ramos’ coverage of Latin America affairs is characterized by his opposition to the Cuba and Venezuela regimes, which is his litmus test to consider whether Latin American leaders are genuine democrats. Even after the announcement of establishing relations with Cuba, one of the questions he asked to the US diplomat in charge of the negotiations was whether he addresses Raul Castro as Dictator or President. His interviewing style can startle his guests, but some like the president of El Salvador have engaged him in feisty exchanges. His distinction of democratic governments and economic development is criticized as supportive of the elites of Latin American countries.
Gustavo’s description of Reagan’s reform fails to mention the significant support provided by the Democratic Congress, or the impact of 9/11 on the management of borders. At the local level, currently his position on crime and punishment is not one would expect in an alternative publication. R. Scott Moxley’s coverage of Jesus Aguirre’s imprisonment is one of the lowest points of the OCW, as well as his criticisms of California courts as being too “lenient!”
The new congress intent on rolling back Obama’s executive order, including the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, has deepened the polarization of this issue. The debate had already verged on hate speech by some immigration opponents. The new OCGOP chairman, Fred Whitaker (right) may have – or should have – drawn positive lessons when the day laborers were an issue that brought a lot of attention to his city of Orange. Let’s see whether he’ll continue the position of the previous chairman Scott Baugh, who had been moving toward accepting immigrants and comprehensive reform.
So is the comprehensive emigration in the eyes of Mexicans perpetual amnesty?…….. 5 million every 8 years?
I do not think that you have reasonable answer Mr. Toro.
Mr Fiala, any plan that contemplates mass deportations, breaking up families, is unreasonable. You may remember the bipartisan ” Gang of Eight” had agreed to a reasonable solution. Until this solution is found, I invite you to read this unorthodox proposal:
http://freakonomics.com/2014/11/06/should-the-u-s-merge-with-mexico-full-transcript/
Unfortunately you have not answer my question Mr. Toro.
So called reasonable solution, to which you are referring to, increased illegal immigration from about 2M during Reagan amnesty to about 11M in about 25 years.
The truth is Mr. Toro that there is big difference between the immigration and the exodus.
FYI, as the Santa Ana Mayoral candidate in 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008, I have ran on the open border platform because of my 22 years experience living behind the iron curtain.
However, nothing will be achieved as long as socialists are coming up with the bovine ideas.
France and the rest of socialistic EU is learning the hard way.
Under the Schengen Agreement EU countries have no borders among themselves but it is colliding with their socialistic and politically correct ideas.
As long as Democrats and Republicans will adhere to socialistic principles while trying to resolve the immigration they will fail.
Since the USA is under the left-liberal-progressive-socialistic choke hold and based on my empirical knowledge of social order, I personally do not see any happy ending to resolve the immigration issue.
“The new congress intent on rolling back Obama’s executive order, including the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, has deepened the polarization of this issue.”……… Hmmmmmmm
I do not know if you have noticed Mr. Toro, but the congers (the people) are not as much against the immigration as they are against the president’s lawlessness and lies on this issue.
If you want to be true American you must learn the constitution and swear to protect it.
So far you are failing miserably to do so!
Please elaborate on the President’s lawlessness and lies on this issue.
President Obama has seen 20 unanimous defeats before the Supreme Court during the five and a half years of his presidency.
Since you have shown great ignorance in your request, do your own research via your own sources because you will not trust me even if I will quote U.S. Supreme Court.
OK, Ricardo, back on track:
Obama didn’t “keep his promise on immigration” because the Republicans in Congress made it impossible. He did about as much as he could with Executive Orders without getting impeached — and there were still calls for impeachment. He’s fair game for criticism on stepping up removals, but there’s great differences in opinion on whether those removals involved those who, through criminal actions, had “earned” it. I’ve never seen the true facts there adequately nailed down.
Gustavo’s position, as usual, is to seek any possible way to denigrate the Democratic Party and argue that we are no different than Darrell Issa-style Republicans. I’m a pretty disgruntled Democrat myself these days, but the notion that the party that has been willing to pass reasonable immigration reform is equivalent to the party that has been blocking it is just click-baiting nonsense. And if the Democrats did endorse completely amnesty — and got shellacked for it in the subsequent elections, as would happen — Gustavo would be the first to slam Democrats for their weakness and stupidity as evidenced by the election results.
So why exactly should Democrats listen to Gustavo on this issue? Because we’re masochists? It’s like saying that Gustavo should listen to me when I advise him that if the Weekly is really devoted to free speech, it should feature large photos of full-frontal nudity on the front page of every issue. That would make me a real free speech radical — but of course he, rather than I, would be the one who would have to live with the consequences (including the failure of the paper and loss of his own job), so he would be perfectly reasonable not to listen to that advice of mine.
For Gustavo failing to listen to statements of mine that he should listen to, just stay tuned….
Bloviator: This blog’s constant attention on me is almost as creepy as Dan C’s. That Richard has to dig up a months-old essay to score brownie points with you is just pathetic, but indicative of this shit pit’s influence.
Oh, and way more Mexicans have been deported under Democrats, from Clinton to FDR to Obama, than under any Republican, as loathsome as they are— but, of course, your bloviations can’t deal with facts.
Echón y Cabrón: Ricardo wrote what he seems to think was an approving story involving you. I didn’t commission the story; he earned no brownie points; he doesn’t need them from me anyway, as he’s welcome to write what he wants whenever he wants — and even when I don’t fully agree I’m happy to see it see daylight.
I don’t think I’ve reviewed the Mexican deportation statistics for each President since FDR; do you have them? By the way, I favor deportation for actual (violent and other predatory, not status-based) criminals — so I hope that your statistics separate out those groups. If you don’t think they should, go ahead and explain yourself. If you want to be really sophisticated — which you probably do not — then you can figure out how much of the misdeeds of the Democratic Party stemmed from the time when it was dominated in Congress by southern conservatives (now affiliated with the Republican Party) or times when the President (like Clinton in 1995-96 with IIRIRA) caved into Republican pressure to appeal to an electorate whipped up into a xenophobic frenzy by, overwhelmingly, Republicans. (But careful, undermining your “Democrats are just as bad” shtick might make you seem like “just another Latino” — and then you might lose your gig.)
Despite my enjoying Urizen’s wit, I agree with you that you’re not an Objectivist. You come by your cabrónismo (yes, my coinage) by another path. If you have a model, it would be someone like Jaime Escalante — or (although hopefully no longer) Bill Cosby. But I’m told that in real like, when you’re not preening and strutting, you’re generally pretty reasonable.
(And look up what “constant” means, you hypersensitive quivering bundle of scraped nerve endings, so that you can stop embarrassing yourself by confusing it with “occasional” or “occasional, if that.”)
I THINK “Richard” is the person that Gustavo believes Urizen to be. I don’t think he’s referring to Ricardo.
I think he is referring to me. I thought that I made clear that I had intended to post this piece early December. The content of his essay is still relevant for the subject being discussed. I don’t mind if disqualifications come from the two klepto PR operatives, but coming from Gustavo is disappointing. He must realize that he is a prominent opinion maker, and his views bring public attention. I wonder with whom he was trying to score brownie points when the District Elections efforts made him yawn.
I have to say that I agree with Greg here. Gustavo’s history is way off. There was bi partisan support of immigration reform under Reagan but under this reform it made it illegal to hire undocumented workers and changed the law as to the status of parents of citizens.
Yes, this.
And let’s not forget two key points. One: There are limits to the President’s power. And two: Republicans in Congress mostly do NOT want to agree to any CIR deal with the President. So both of these limit President Obama’s options.
Frankly, I would have liked to see the President take further executive action sooner. Still, he ultimately did it. And now, a bunch of Republican state Attorneys General are suing him over it. That pretty much says it all regarding the state of play for CIR these days.
Bush and Reagan? The Clown Prince of Pochos is way out of his league clearly. His position as “The Mexican” allows him to proclaim these inanities based on his vast erudition at taco sampling in Orange County…limited a bit? Gus is a comic and a failed food writer, those are his only real gigs.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but it is obvious that Gustavo’s views are relevant to be considered by major media outlets, and it is not because of his culinary knowledge.
For a floundering attempt at justifying his politics, here’s a link to Gus calling himself a libertarian. No qualifications except a put down of his secret crush, Ayn Rand. The concepts of social versus economic libertarianism or historical context are too complex for the Weekly readership of stoned teenagers and desperate middle aged Johns.
His greatest hero, the real power behind the original non corporate OC Wankly, was another failed academic, Will Swaim, who has gone completely over to the far right anti-labor John Hancock foundation. Right wing kooks, can’t escape their Bircher OC roots… er, raisas?
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/10/ayn_rand_institute_irvine.php
Find ONE instance where I praise Ayn Rand, and I’ll give you $100. One. Of course, your pathetic anon ass won’t be able to find it, because this shit blog’s crush on me is such that they’re blinded to any actual facts.
I believe you are the only non-Aryan Libertarian I have ever done known in the great OC- say it loud! Be proud- Swaim is waiting for you on the darkside!
SHHH!!! He thinks he IS Aryan! (Haha — just kidding, cabrón.)
Actually, Pedroza is another one like that. There are other similarities too, but the money from Arizona obscures them.
“Obama didn’t “keep his promise on immigration” because the Republicans in Congress made it impossible.”……… Hmmmmmm
Are you lying like this in your capacity as an officer of the court?
The republicans simply ask Obama to secure the border first…. Obama refused!
Instead he violated the constitution against his own public advise…. which he uttered twenty two (22) times.
I feel sorry for your diabolical handicap.
Asking for the border to be secure (assuming that by “secure” you mean every last, square, fucking inch of it) is simply a pretext for wanting to do nothing.
And what the Republicans – the more intelligent, cynical ones who aren’t Mexican haters themselves – want, is just to not lose the big section of the Republican voting base that hates Mexicans.
Put your shit where it belongs Nelson, and ask your self: What good is controlled emigration via checkpoint if every day 100ts go around it?
Can you answer that with some reasoning?
I forgot, same like Zenger you too probably do no talk to crazy people in-front of the 7/11.
I do talk to crazy people in front of 7-11 if I have time and I’m in the mood.
And sometimes I tell them immigration over our southern border has zeroed out over the last few years, between better enforcement, our shitty economy, and Mexico’s improving conditions. Can’t do much better than that. But you also can’t bang that fact into people’s heads who won’t accept it.
SO what is your model for the so called “comprehensive immigration”? How it would look like under present border condition.
What documents would a person get if he goes via the checkpoint and what document would person get walking via desert.
What immigration status would they have each?
Oh, no. Who let the [REDACTED] in?
At least he’s now admitting where his immense “wisdom” comes from.
He was always here. It’s just that until recently he was chained in the basement dungeon. Vern let him out because of the whining.
jaja, that part’s true about the basement dungeon. All documented here, way back in 2008:
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2008/06/what-it-takes-to-be-a-blogger-in-orange-county/
Yes, that is what I thought!
No answer given to me, no answer given to public and no answer given to congers.
Only Jonathan Gruber intelligentsia response — we do not talk to people because they are stupid.
Good luck in 2916 with such attitude.
Hell, good luck in 2916 with any attitude. We’ll all be heads in bell jars by then.
“Hell, good luck in 2916 with any attitude. We’ll all be heads in bell jars by then.”………. Hmmmmmm
Not mine since my legal occupation is Immortality Concept Researcher as publis at http://www.smartvoter.org/2002/11/05/ca/or/vote/fiala_s/
*Have tried to stay out of this…but: Gustavo is right again. We are not going to send 11 million folks anywhere soon. The Republican heirachy doesn’t want to look at the days before HIB Visas and selective admission adopted by the Australians back in the 1970’s. If you have cash and want to invest in our country: Come on down. The Aussies kept raising the import bucks from $10,000 to $100,000 and you could emmigrate, as long as you invested in a new business of some sort. The 2nd stage was adding the HIB Visas into the mix so that we could pay well trained and educated India folks 3/4 pay and treat them like indentured servants. The third leg of the school, was our attitude on educating foreigners. Sure, come on down and go to Harvard Business School and pay us a cool million dollars over your four year education. Then, we also liked some of the low end people who wanted to become soldiers and go into our volunteer military…..folks like Hassan….(Fort Hood)…..and thousands that just wanted to become Americans at some point in the future and bring their mom’s and dads and brothers and sisters too. You wonder why the Republicans are bugged that Obama ran a game on them? Ha! He got them good and they are pissed. The truth that they can’t get around is that “if you are born in this country” you are a US citizen and that allows your family and friends a leg up in becoming Green Card holders, which is quite right. What is not right is that we do not place asteriks on family members, who may be coming to our country for reasons other than beneficial to the greater populace. Anyone that goes to train in Yemen, Syria or for a Terrorist Organization, anywhere on earth……should immediately lose their US access, no matter who they are related to. US Citizens born here, should be liable to felony prosecution for the overthrow of the United States through force of arms. The issues are complex – but the first step is to legalized those that are here now, sort them out, deport the bad guys and embrace the rest. This is no different than Ellis Island….and the Vito Corleone’s of the world are still coming. As we can see from the events in France, unless we integrate these folks into our country, we are looking forward to some very serious problems in the future. Enclaves and no-police Zones or fire or Edison or Gas Company folks endanger us all.
Your defense of the 11 million is noted, but Gus is simply whining about Ray-Bush to get the reactions of … Repubs, Democrats, progressives, anyone actually listening or involved in government. I sense a sincerely felt need for attention, a lack of early childhood warmth and acceptance. I am not saying anything about his mother specifically, but ya gotta wonder, given his comedy columns, how such self-loathing came to be.
*Oh that……correctly noted…maybe he is suffering from writers block?
https://www.cpj.org/awards/2014/jorge-ramos.php
The elite vs the oppressed. Politics have nothing to do with Power, corruption, oprressor, against the victim!
This is classical case of: “when two (many) fights the third (I) will benefit” the Sun Tzu doctrine.
I was banned by Arellano
I was banned by Pedroza
I was banned by Chameleonovski
I was banned by Cunningham
I was banned by Santana
I was banned by anyone who publishes blog i OC.
I was banned by Nelson
Now they all banning each other and Nelson is banning all, therefore, I (the third one) am the Superior Beneficiary……. The Leader because I am genetically higher intelligence.
I will let them to fight little longer and then I will order them to obey and lick may ass as reincarnated Sun Tzu.
Vern, Stanislaw wants to be banned again. Can I also delete all of his comments?
Why?
Because you can only stay reasonably well-behaved for a couple of days — and then you soil your environment.
Please elaborate on “reasonably well-behaved” in the spirit of the constitutional society.
Show me any points of authority.
Does anybody know Fred Whitaker’s take on Immigration and on the Executive Order?
Vern, anything in your uber-transom apparatus?