What should we think of Latino/black “tensions?”

DURHAM: Known for something other than the Bulls

Anybody who says there is no tension between this country’s growing Latino population and the numbers of African-American people who live here is being Pollyanna-ish.

I comprehend the sense among some black people who see the surging numbers of Latinos (the official Census Bureau population count for 2010 is going to make them twinge later this year) and feel like, once again, they are being surpassed in our society.

IT DOESN’T HELP that some Latinos go out of their way to make distinctions that most people of sense wouldn’t notice, all because they don’t want to be thought of as being black, or tied to black people, in any way.

Yet to think that the issue doesn’t get any more complex than that is nothing more than being simple-minded. Personally, I sense that for all the times that Latinos shake our heads in bewilderment at something done by a black person, there are just as many times that we are equally amazed at the actions of white people.

In short, you all can be pretty ridiculous at times. Then again, there are times when my own ethnic brethren can do something stupid that the nativist element eagerly tries to associate with the masses.

Personally, I think that we have two dueling groups in terms of a Latino population and a black population, and there are going to be occasions when their interests will coincide, and others when they will conflict.

THERE WILL BE the times when our ethnic interests will be more like those other ethnic groups that have made the move to this country and become a part of the overall society, with some of our traits merging into the mass and being picked up by others.

Now what brought on this little literary diatribe on my part concerning our current ethnic/race relations in this country?

It was reading a recent report published in the Herald-Sun newspaper of Durham, N.C. (which apparently has more going on these days than Duke University basketball).

A murder last year resulted in the arrests of five young men. The people who now face criminal charges for the death of Bernardo Medina Ponce are working their way through the legal process.

MEDINA WAS NOT born in this country, and officials suspect his command of the English language was weak enough that he didn’t fully appreciate that the five black men confronting him were armed, and wanted his money.

So we have a Latino killed by black men, and some locals are calling it a hate crime, saying that the would-be robbers singled Medina out because of his ethnicity. Others who don’t like to have to acknowledge hate crimes are saying that the men would have tried to rob somebody, and Medina just had the crummy luck of coming within their eyesight at the exact wrong point in time.

An officer with the local county Sheriff’s Department says this is not a new trend. While making it clear to the Herald-Sun that he was merely offering his opinion, and not that of the sheriff, he said such black-on-Latino crimes have been taking place since 1997 – and he claims they are only going to increase in total.

“The targeting of innocent Latinos will soon manifest itself in violent ethnic conflict between blacks and Latinos,” he said to the Durham-based newspaper.

OUCH!

But what concerns me more is the part of this officer’s report that says “law-abiding” people won’t have to worry much. Following the logic that people used to express about organized crime that it was only criminals ripping off each other, the officer said, “The conflict will most likely occur between gang members.”

I’m wondering how many people are going to take this train of thought and try to exploit it in ways to provoke Latino/black tensions so as to benefit themselves. I’m not saying that this sheriff’s department officer is trying to do so. 

But his law enforcement logic sounds like something that could easily be distorted by certain people who are eager to stir things up.

WHICH MIGHT VERY well be the best reason for Latinos and black people to seriously think of putting aside differences that some might use to keep us separate – if we’re not careful, the only winners will be those nativist nitwits who are probably the grand-children of the segregationists of old.

As fior those of you who are about to tell me THAT statement is oversimplified and a generalization, I'd say it's about as accurate as trying to claim that all Latino and African-American people are constantly at each others' throats.

  -30-

¿La luz al fin del tùnel? Or is a train about to hit us?

A part of me has always realized that much of the rancid rhetoric we hear these days whenever immigration, or ethnicity in general, is brought up is just the desperate pleas of an element of our society that can’t handle the inevitable when it comes to our society in the 21^st Century.

I honestly believe that much of the trash talk we hear and read these days will look so absurd to future generations. They will wonder how anyone among us could ever have taken it seriously.

WHICH IS WHY I got a kick out of a pair of stories I read Friday that relate to the political people in Arizona who led that state’s effort to impose measures meant to get their local law enforcement involved in the policing of federal immigration policies.

For it would seem that we’re already starting to see the signs that people are turning on the kind of cheap talk that got the nativist element of our society all stirred up last year, and even got some political people in states other than Arizona to think that somehow the Grand Canyon State was onto something significant.

Yet the Washington Post reported how many of the 20-plus states that have talked of passing “Arizona-like” laws are now finding that they’re either going to have to tone down the rhetoric considerably – or else incur significant financial obligations if local police departments are seriously expected to do anything with immigration, other than profile people of a certain skin complexion.

That, of course, would cause so many problems that even many law enforcement types in these states are letting their legislators know they’d rather not be bothered.

IT’S NOT LIKE it is a shirking of their responsibilities. Local police departments already have enough duties to deal with, and many are swamped to the point where the last thing they need is to have to cope with immigration issues just because their state legislators want to play national politics this spring and demagogue this issue to death.

In short, reality has impacted the states that were planning to copy Arizona, which would have been mocos blown in the face of the masses in our society who had enough sense not to get all worked up over the rhetoric tied to immigration reform.

For me, this issue has been theoretical. My home city is one that designates itself a “Sanctuary City,” which restricts local police from doing anything to get involved in immigration policy. Nearby Indiana is caught up in this nonsense-talk, but my home state has officials who promised to do nothing along the lines of Arizona – and they all managed to get themselves re-elected last year, the year that the ideologues fantasize about as being the beginning of their “Conquest of America!”

Actually, when you phrase it that way, it sounds so ridiculous that I can’t help but laugh at anyone who was ever delusional to believe any of it.

IT’S ALMOST LIKE the whole nativist rant is so last year. And last year has been over for 30 days now. It’s time to move forward. And forward, in this case, includes an acknowledgement that anyone who dreams of mass deportation is being ridiculous.

It’s not just the other states. Even Arizona is showing signs of second thoughts – or at least a willingness by some people to say publicly that their legislative officials forgot to take their medication last year.



PEARCE: A recall over immigration stance?

Somos Republicanos, the Arizona-based group trying to get more Latinos into the GOP, is going so far as to try to organize a recall election against state Senate President Russell Pearce, R-Mesa.

Pearce has sponsored, endorsed or generally spoken out vehemently in favor of many measures that are blatantly hostile toward those people not like himself – or more truthfully, those who are much like the people who already lived in Arizona when his ancestors allegedly settled the state in the 1860s.

THE YUMA SUN newspaper reported that the group saw his support of altering the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution (the one about birthright citizenship) as the final straw. They want him out.

Now I’ll agree their attempt at a recall is a longshot (they have four months to get 7,756 signatures on petitions to force a special election, and all the signatures have to come from registered voters living in Pearce’s legislative district). I won’t be surprised if nothing comes of it.

But if we really had the momentum going in the direction the nativists want to take our society, I’d think that a group like Somos Republicanos (which often is more concerned with picking at Democrats and their neglect of Latinos rather than looking at Republicans and their abuse) would not even be willing to make the effort.

They’d want to keep quiet.

INSTEAD, THEY’RE WILLING to rock the boat/stir the pot/whatever euphemism you prefer. Because they know there will be an element out there willing to back them.

Which is why I really don’t think the “light” is a freight train coming on to plow us under.

  -30-

Obama immigration “boost” not enough for ideologues

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials boasted this week before a Congressional committee about how they have increased their efforts to root out non-citizens who are working in this country without the proper work permits.

Not that it is pleasing to the conservative ideologues who now control the House of Representatives. For they made it clear that they want a more abrupt approach to trying to catch people in the act of being employed without a visa and work permits.

THOSE REPUBLICAN OFFICIALS made it clear they want a return to the old days, “old” in this case being the days of George W. Bush – when Immigration officials would suddenly burst into a factory or other company, announce themselves in a token gesture to legal procedure, then take everybody into custody so it could be determined just how many of the workers were not U.S. citizens.

Those loud, obnoxious raids became a thing of the past when Barack Obama became president. He has wanted to focus attention more on the people living in this country without a valid visa who are building up criminal records, while also realizing that the real “crime” when it comes to the hiring of non-visa’ed foreigners is being committed by the companies themselves.

As Kumar Kibble – a deputy director for Immigration – told Congress, the agency wants to find, “criminal illegal aliens who pose a threat to the public.”

The people whom the ideologues want to pick up are the ones whose sole interest is merely working for a living, while also staying far in the shadows of our society. They’re not looking to cause trouble.

IN FACT, THAT is the very reason why the employers who violate federal law by hiring non-citizens without work permits do so. They want a quiet, compliant workforce that will pipe down in cases where the employers choose to ignore certain labor regulations.

So in recent years, we have had Immigration officials doing workplace inspections where federal officials will go through the ranks of a company’s staff and figure out who should not be employable in this country.

In 2010, there were 2,746 worksite enforcement investigations. Two hundred and thirty-seven violations were found, and the fines charged to the companies were in excess of $7 million.

Those people found to be working without papers do get reported, and many do eventually get caught up in the deportation process. The fact is that deportations overall have been on the rise during the Obama presidential administration.

IT IS THE major factor behind the perception among some Latinos that Obama himself isn’t willing to stick up for the concerns of our growing segment of the population.

Yet to the ideologues, that increase and the displeasure of the people they’re most willing to tick off isn’t good enough.

They want the raids! They want the sight of people suddenly fleeing in a vain attempt to elude “la Migra.” They like the thought of the moment when an individual feels hopeless when they realize they’re not going to get away, and that they’re now stuck in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureaucracy.

Personally, I wonder how much more realistic it is to think of Cheech and Chong films that invariably included immigration raid scenes, particularly the 1987 Cheech Marin film “Born in East L.A.,” where his character gets caught in a raid and deported to Tijuana while his Mexican-born cousin manages to walk away unscathed because federal authorities are more obsessed with detaining the bushy-mustached creature in front of them, along with some elderly women.

THINK OF THE Keystone Cops, updated for the late 20^th Century.

But that is what the ideologues would like, if their rhetoric is to be taken literally. Actually, it shouldn’t be.

Even the most hard-core nativist realizes that, at best, they will only get support in the House of Representatives. The Senate remains a Democrat-controlled legislative body, and Obama still has his “veto” power.

Which means all this rhetoric about wanting raids and tougher measures is really nothing more than pompous political posturing. They want to be able to feed their backers on the thought that an Obama administration isn’t doing enough – even though overall deportations are on the rise.

BUT WITH OBAMA, we get some consideration that some of the people without visas probably should be allowed to stay, and that we ought to figure out a way to get them the visa that will make all of this rhetoric a moot point. Although activists would argue that “consideration” hasn’t translated into action.

It is the ideologues who stand in the way of that happening, and now want to stir up resentment even further in this country.

That may well be their right. We do have freedom of expression in this country. They can say whatever nitwit thoughts pop into their head.

There’s just no reason why we, the people, need to take any of it seriously.

  -30-

The immigration reality – he can’t make anybody happy

OBAMA: Channelling Bill Clinton?

President Barack Obama gave his State of the Union address this week, and seems to have managed to tick off just about all sides when it comes to reform of the nation’s immigration policies.

Perhaps the president thinks that if everybody is upset, he must be doing something right. But the fact is that there are a lot of people ticked off these days.

FOR THE RECORD, Obama largely ignored the issue when delivering his speech to a joint session of Congress. He did bring up the DREAM Act that failed back in December in the old Congress’ final moments of existence.

“Let’s stop expelling talented, responsible young people who can staff our research labs, start new businesses and further enrich this nation,” the president said.

Of course, he didn’t say whether that means he wants to push for the DREAM Act, which gives those non-citizens who have lived the bulk of their lives in this country a chance to get “resident alien” status and eventual citizenship if they earn a college degree or serve in the military.

Did the president merely scold Congress, telling them they had been “naughy” for not passing the DREAM Act back in December? There certainly wasn’t anything resembling a promise to push for the issue again this year.

THERE CERTAINLY WASN’T anything resembling discussion of any other issue related to the immigration reform debate.

CLINTON: He "felt" our pain

There certainly wasn’t anything resembling much of anything of substance.

Yet the fact that the president mentioned the issue even in that limited form is also upsetting to the ideologues who are determined to demonize people. How dare the president refer to these foreigners as “talented” and “responsible” and use the word “expel” to describe their removal from this country! It makes it sound so sordid.

Personally, I didn’t watch the speech. I read transcripts after the fact to figure out what he said, which when it comes to immigration-related issues was really a whole lot of nothing.

I GET THE sense that for Obama, he’s trying to send a subtle message to the people with an interest in legitimate reform of immigration (anybody who thinks deportations is part of the solution is being ridiculous) that, on a certain level, he sympathizes with us.

Was Wednesday the Latino equivalent of that moment in 1992 when then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton, in response to an AIDS activist’s question, said, “I feel your pain.”

Is “Let’s stop expelling talented, responsible young people …” supposed to be the equivalent of saying Obama feels our pain, and that he wishes he could do something – if not for the Republican majority of the House of Representatives that owes its presence to the conservative ideologues who want those “talented, responsible young people” demonized and deported?

Now I’m not giving the GOP influence a pass. They are the reason why this issue won’t advance – even though our nation’s mess of an immigration policy is in need of serious repair and the failure to do so will cause un-repairable harm to many individuals.

BUT I’M ALSO not terribly interested in someone to “feel our pain,” so to speak. What we had hoped to hear was a sense of, “where do we go from here” now that there is a GOP influence stymieing the issue in Congress.

And as for those who will now say that Obama’s focus on the economy was the proper one because we can’t get immigration reform at a time like this, I’d say that’s nonsense. The people peddling trash on this issue will have their hang-ups just as intense even when the economy makes its inevitable rebound.

Now is as good a time as any other to address the issue of immigration. The very real problem is here and won’t go away.

  -30-

Quinceañera a quaint custom? Or essential life moment?

One of these days, I probably should have a talk with my cousin, Alexandra, who to the best of my memory was the only cousin of mine who went through the teenage Latina ritual known as the Quinceañera.

The fifteenth birthday, treated as a major milestone in a female’s life – the point at which she is considered an adult. It can be an overbloated excuse for a party in some Latino families.

BECAUSE IT WASN’T a significant part of the family ritual of my life, I have been inclined to view it as something a bit odd. I’d probably be somewhat like Julia Alvarez, who wrote a book published in 2007 about the ritual (an interesting book that turns up quite a bit these days in remaindered book bins – only $3.99!).

Entitled, “Once Upon A Quinceañera,” she tried figuring why families, particularly those to whom the thousands of dollars that the whole fiesta can cost was quite an expense, didn’t try putting the money into a college fund for their kids, or find some other use for the money that could help enhance their own status in life.

Which is why I found interesting an essay written by Melissa Garcia and published at the website Gozamos.com. She writes of having parents who would just as soon have not bothered with the ritual, but ultimately gave in to her wishes to connect with her ethnicity – and now considers her quinceañera held nearly 10 years ago to be, “one of the best days of my life.”

I’m not sure I agree with her. But her essay is worth reading. At least until I can have a talk with my cousin, who has lived the bulk of her life with her mother (my aunt) down in Texas and away from the Chicago portion of our family.

UNTIL THEN, I will have to think of the 2005 film “Quinceañera” whenever the ritual is mentioned in my presence.

While watching a film about a pregnant Latina and a gay Latino (they’re cousins, and the outcasts of their family who gradually work their way back into acceptance) might sound like the makings of a depressing afternoon, the details in how the two of them support each other at their lowest moments makes for a pleasing tale that overcomes the emphasis some place upon stretch limousines and other trivial details whenever the event comes up.

  -30-

Lugar going to be bashed for not being sufficiently hostile toward Latinos

LUGAR: ¿Nuestro amigo nuevo?

Dick Lugar is a long-time member of the U.S. Senate (Farrah Fawcett was still Majors – and hot – back when he first got elected) and a part of the Republican Party establishment.

Which as far as the conservative ideologues are concerned, makes him suspect. The 79-year-old from Indianapolis (he once was mayor of that Midwestern city) who is one of the most senior members of the U.S. Senate plans to run again when his current term ends in 2012.

THAT HAS THE ideologues already beginning their rhetoric that claims Lugar has been around for too long, and is too out of touch with the way the conservatives want things done these days.

These people have their gripes against Lugar, whom I have always regarded as a part of the political establishment and definitely NOT someone espousing some sort of radical thought.

Yet perhaps if he were peddling outrageous trash, these ideologues would be willing to have him stick around the Senate.

Particularly when it comes to ethnic issues. It seems that Lugar is seen as too sympathetic to the growing Latino population. So he must go. Off with his head. Replace him with an ideologue who will spout the appropriate, mean-spirited rhetoric that they want to hear.

LUGAR GETS DINGED because, throughout the years, he has believed that the DREAM Act – which is meant to give non-citizens who have lived the bulk of their lives in this country a chance at citizenship if they show promise by continuing their education or serving in the military – is a good idea.

He was one of the few GOP types who voted for the bill when the issue in general came up back in December (remember how it was killed off through procedural measures, and never actually came up for a final vote?). In fact, Lugar has actually been willing to let his name be used as a sponsor of this radical (only to the ideologues) idea.

He and Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., made a nice Illinois/Indiana political pairing that tried to push for the idea – unlike Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who seems to think his dreams of someday running for president get boosted by bashing Illinois on issues (an aspect best debated in another commentary).

Of course, that too makes him suspect – a willingness to try to work with politicians of other political parties because one wants something of substance to be accomplished on a specific issue.

NOW I CAN be as politically partisan as anybody else. But there are times when such ideas ought to be set aside for the good of the populace.

Of course, the conservative ideologues don’t see things that way. They don’t like the fact that Lugar has been willing to be supportive of some ideas touted by Democrats.

I also couldn’t help but notice reports indicating that some of these ideologues don’t like the fact that Lugar didn’t join in the heavy Republican opposition to President Barack Obama’s two appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States.

They particularly still seem to be hung up on Sonia Sotomayor, the Nuyorican (someone of Puerto Rican descent who was born and raised in New York City) who became the first Latina ever chosen to serve on the nation’s high court.

IF YOU DOUBT me, consider the Indianapolis Star newspaper, which reported of the Tea Party activist groups that met in rural Tipton, Ind., to determine how to go about beating Lugar.

They made sure to point out that while they were meeting in an “all-American” place, Lugar that same day was receiving an award from a civic group, La Plaza, which was honoring him because of his willingness to stand up  for the DREAM Act.

A coincidence of timing? I doubt it.

Now I don’t live in Indiana. On a certain level, I don’t care who represents that state. But what I do know is that the Hoosier State is just like everywhere else in this country.

ITS LATINO POPULACE is on the rise – state studies estimate that it will nearly double during the next three decades, and that the current Latino population contributes about $7.3 billion per year to the state’s economy.

So if these people really think they can dump on a political veteran because he’s not appropriately hostile to Latinos (one can argue he’s just representing the interests of a growing part of his constituency), they ought to consider that their actions could cause that growing number to decide to “dump” on them if they keep this up.

  -30-

Not as sweet as some think it sounds

ISSA: The latest immigration reform distraction

There are those individuals who like to think they’re bringing an “enlightened” tone to the debate over immigration and reform when they say we ought to be requiring certain levels of education of people who want to live in our nation – rather than the one they were born in.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., is playing off that attitude with a bill he introduced earlier this year. His measure, which may well get serious hearings and approval from the new House of Representatives, says people who come from other countries to study here should be allowed to stay in the United States – if they are able to find work with U.S.-based companies once they graduate.

UNDER THE TERMS of most visas issued to these foreign students, they are expected to leave the country once their studies here are complete.

It sounds nice. A whole group of people with the ambition to get a higher education, some of whom likely have specialized skills that could be used to the benefit of our society, should get the priority.

Yet anyone who looks at this idea with any sense of decency ought to realize what a crock it truly is.

Because what Issa, by his own admission, wants is for these increased visas to the “educated” to replace the visa “lottery” that now exists. It is a process by which applications from people from various countries that don’t send a lot of people to the U.S. are picked at from random.

THE IDEA BEING that we get a variety of the world’s population when it comes to the breakdown of those who come from other countries to have a life in the United States.

These people also want to cut back on the visas that are given to the family members of individuals who have managed to gain permanent residence – if not outright citizenship – in the United States.

Too often, they feed us the image of scruffy families coming one right after the other to flood our nation.

It’s a snobby attitude to take toward individuals, and what amuses me about the people who make this argument is that they usually are the ones who complain that the educated among our society are somehow out-of-touch with the masses.

BUT IF IT somehow means cutting back on foreigners they consider to be “undesirable,” then they are willing to play up the benefits of education.

As I have written here before, I consider the whole concept of citizenship to be a fluke. It is an accident of birth, if I may say so.

I am a United States citizen by birth because three of my four grandparents (and in the case of the fourth, her parents – my great-grandparents) had the gumption to look for a better life not in their immediate neighborhood or region. They looked all the way to another nation.

And yes, they came back before there were any federal immigration laws, or back in the early days of those laws when the whole concept of Mexican citizens being “illegal” was considered absurd.

IF ANYTHING, I think the notion of someone who is so unwilling to let life hold them down that they are willing to abandon everything they have known to move to another nation shows a level of determination that we ought to be encouraging to come.

Not all of them are going to have those education levels that Issa claims he wants (but his bill is really nothing more than putting up more obstacles in the immigration process – real immigration reform ought to be about eliminating them).

Besides, if we’re going to start claiming that one has to have a certain education level to be worthy of U.S. citizenship, does this mean we can start revoking it from people if – at age 18 or 21 – they do not show enough potential to deserve it?

I could make jokes about how this would turn 95 percent of the populations of Alabama or Mississippi into “illegal aliens,” but I’m not going to because it is a ridiculous concept.

THEN AGAIN, IT isn’t any more ridiculous than most of the pompous rhetoric that gets spewed in the name of immigration whenever the issue gets debated by political people.

Just like this bill, which in all likelihood will wither away into nothingness if the House actually passes it along to the U.S. Senate.

  -30-

¿Alcalde de Los Angeles? Who you kiddin’

You can never tell when an entertainer is kidding when it comes to public policy.

At least that’s the sense I got from learning that comedian George Lopez has bigger aspirations than his late, late night television show on TBS. He went on a local Fox affiliate in Los Angeles not that long ago and said with a relatively straight face that he wants to be mayor of Los Angeles some day.

IN EIGHT YEARS, to be exact.

Now he didn’t give any specific reason for the significance of eight years. In fact, his “logic” for running for mayor seemed based on the idea that action film actor Arnold Schwarzenegger managed to get himself elected governor of California – a position he only recently gave up due to term limits laws in that state.

In fact, the suggestion of being mayor seemed more intended to be the basis for a series of gags. Perhaps this is Lopez’ latest standup comedy routine?

How else to explain his line that we have a President Obama, which would make him Low-bama, and that he wouldn’t be the politician to make change, he would want to take your change.

BUT HE DID bring up one very serious point – one that is not only applicable to his home state that was once a state in Mexico. There will be a significant Latino population that will in future years age itself into a significant voter bloc.

Although I don’t think California will ever be as high as “96.4 percent Latino” that Lopez predicted for the year 2019 – which is the number he quipped would be necessary for people to take his political aspirations seriously – the fact is that it will be a majority Latino state in the near future.

As will much of the rest of the southwestern United States. Even other parts of the country will have large-enough Latino populations to create conditions by which our political concerns and desires cannot be ignored.

The day will come when the idea of a person as ethnic as Lopez running for office will not seem quite so bizarre. It will seem ever so natural.

THAT DAY WILL be when we realize the reason the thought of Lopez for mayor of Los Angeles is ridiculous is because he’s a comedian who tells third-rate jokes! I can’t envision him having a serious thought about public policy.

Be honest.

The attraction to the old George Lopez Show that used to air on ABC affiliates wasn’t so much Lopez himself as it was Belita Moreno – the actress who played the part of his mother.

Now the character of “Benny Lopez” for public office; that’s a thought I could get behind. Mess with us, and she’ll smack you around pretty good.

  -30-

Tone differences? Or differing audiences?

I’m not a regular reader of the Fox News Channel website meant to appeal to the nation’s growing Latino population, although I do stumble across it from time to time.

The big difference I have noticed of Fox News Latino compared to the regular Fox News website is that it seems like when Latinos or any kind of relevant issue are in the news, the story gets relegated to the Fox News Latino website.

IT ALMOST SEEMS like somebody thinks that “real people” (defined as anybody just like the person putting together the news report) shouldn’t have to read stories about the Latino hoard.

Which is why I found a report by Media Matters for America to be intriguing. They found reports covered by both websites, and found that the more blunt-spoken rhetoric preferred by the nativist types turned up on Fox News.

The Latino website got the stories covered in a “straightforward manner.” Although I still remember the Fox News Latino early days – when they covered those miners trapped in Chile by giving us the angle of the miner who was in trouble with his wife because she found out about his mistress!

Even that site can have its sensationalistic moments.

WHICH MAKES ME wonder if this is a case where Fox types figure they can keep us away from their “real” website with an alternate version? Perhaps they don’t realize that the whole point of the Internet is for people to be capable of stumbling across something unexpected at virtually any moment?

I’m not going to get too much more worked up over this discrepancy. You can read the sites for yourself and figure out what you think of the spin each one puts on things.

GINGRICH: Better than Fox Latino?



The one point I will make is that if I am searching for a website containing copy about the Latino perspective of our society from a conservative viewpoint, I actually prefer The Americano. That’s the site affiliated with one-time House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

At least his site openly admits when it is spewing commentary and opinion (which they have every right to hold), rather than trying to claim their view is hard-hitting fact that cannot be disputed.

  -30-

When it comes to healthcare reform, it’s all about the spin

Are they coming to their senses ...

It depends on one’s perception. A historic moment occurred Wednesday in the House of Representatives.

Or maybe nothing of significance happened at all.

WHAT TOOK PLACE was the promised vote by the new Republican majority to repeal the law passed by the old Democrat-run Congress that implemented health care reform in accordance with President Barack Obama’s desire to make health care services more accessible to all people.

Now I know some people think the new law didn’t go far enough in offering up such services. I’m inclined to agree with them. But this latest vote was by the people who didn’t even want to go as far as Obama managed to do when healthcare reform was enacted into law (although significant portions of the law are still years away from being implemented).

Latino activists always took an aggressive interest in the issue because of the fact that a larger-than-average percentage of the Latino population currently goes without health insurance.

For whatever reason, they can’t get it (anybody who seriously believes they choose not to have it is nothing more than a nitwit).

... in dealing with Barack Obama?



IN FACT, I already have seen some spin saying that the House vote to repeal is a hostile gesture aimed toward the growing Latino population.

I’m not sure I see it as that specifically directed. I think it is more just a hit against anyone who has dared to oppose the conservative ideologues who have tried to thwart anything with Obama’s name attached to it.

Because that is what I see as their real objection to the measure. They can’t claim it as their own. The “other” side gets credit for approving reform (because they were too lazy to address the issue when they had significant control over Congress and the White House).

I particularly noted passages in the Washington Post coverage of Wednesday’s House vote that quoted Republican officials as saying there were portions of the Obama-desired healthcare reform law that would be resurrected in any future Republican-sponsored attempt to reform health care.

OF COURSE, THE point could be made that we shouldn’t be repealing these laws, only to re-approve them at some point in the future.

It is the reason why I have no problem denouncing all the rhetoric about healthcare reform, and viewing anyone who uses the phrase “Obamacare,” as foolish.

It is pure partisan politics.

The members of Congress who on Wednesday voted for this repeal (I’m going to praise one member of my home state’s delegation, Dan Lipinski, who was one of the Democrats who voted against Obama and healthcare reform, but refused to play along with the GOP rhetoric now being spewed on the issue) are doing so in order to put together future campaign mailings that can be sent out claiming they took a “bold stand!!!!” against Obama.

FOR THOSE WHO argue that the only reason the repeal won’t become law is due to partisan politics by the Senate and Obama himself (who would veto Wednesday’s nonsense if it ever came anywhere near the Resolute desk he uses in the Oval Office), I’d argue the only reason it came up for a vote on Wednesday was due to partisan politics.

I also couldn’t help but notice several reports that indicated the way GOP officials went out of their way on Wednesday to tone down the rhetoric during debate. None of the nonsense about a “socialist” in the White House, or corruption.

They tried to make themselves sound sensible and caring, while also trying to protect the business interests of the Insurance industry that does not like the fact that healthcare reform would cut into their profit margin to the benefit of people in need of healthcare services.

Perhaps it means there is something to those various polls that show Obama’s approval ratings on the rise, and that continued rants are going to do little more than reduce their own chances of keeping influence within the federal government come the 2012 election cycle.

  -30-

This is what passes for in-depth reporting on television news these days

I have never expected every single story in a news report to conform to a serious, high-minded standard. I even appreciate the need for some trivial fluff – I have written more than my share of it throughout the years.

But I’m wondering to what degree has Houston-based KRIV-TV (which prefers to think of itself as Fox26) topped the tepid standards for triviality with its latest report about conditions along the U.S./Mexico border – specifically, the border walls erected at various points of the border.

ACTUALLY, THAT DESCRIPTION of the story makes the Houston report (which has been picked up by Fox News Channel proper and its websites, which will spread it about all the more) sound so substantial. It isn’t.

What KRIV-TV managed to come up with was some video by a local filmmaker that depicts two women climbing the barricade that consists of steel pipes filled with concrete. A clock runs during the climb, and it only took them “18 seconds!!!!” to get from Mexico, over the barricade and into the United States.

The story is billed as an example of federal tax dollars being wasted – a poorly constructed barricade that fails in its purpose to keep those Mexicans out of our country.

The reporter who put this piece together (who describes herself as an “Emmy award winning” journalist working in her hometown) then tells how she took this video snippet to various activists involved with immigration policy, and lets the ones who support such nonsense as border walls rant and rage about how the border barricade needs to be more intense.

DOUBLE-LAYERED FENCES. MOTION detectors. Although if one listens to the people who post their anonymous comments on various websites, they also want razor-wire and electric shocks.

How long until someone suggests laying down landmines along the border? It won’t shock me in the least.

Now for those of you who want to see this silly video for yourself, it is out there on YouTube (although proponents of border walls say there are other videos that show segments of the wall built more securely). Knock yourselves out.

It strikes me as being about as substantial as this scintillating report about corporal punishment in schools.

NOW ANYONE WHO has read this weblog before knows I am opposed to the idea of the border wall that got approved by Congress (including a vote from then-Sen. Barack Obama) back in the mid-2000s.

It was a waste of money in that there is no way to construct a barricade that is impenetrable. The idea that someone is trying to play off the fears of people who were naïve enough to think that an un-passable barricade could be built by showing them trivial video snippets such as this bothers me because it elevates the ridiculous to a level of legitimacy it does not deserve.

Personally, I see this YouTube snippet and think of it as merely another silly bit of video that exists on the Internet. I don’t think it has any real message – positive or negative.

I don’t think any differently about border walls now than I did before I wasted a few seconds of my life to watch this snippet.

YET I ALSO realize there are some people who will get some sort of a visceral reaction from this video. They’re the same ones that political people count on whenever they put their anti-immigrant messages into campaign ads, knowing that some people will experience that gut feeling and will vote whatever way is asked as a result.

At least with the politicians, they’re willing to admit they’re stating an opinion. In this case, we get the “We report, you decide” rhetoric. As though someone isn’t trying to influence our thought process with this trivia.

  -30-