How Republicans can win 40% of the vote they need in order to win 2012 Presidential elections

From the Guardian where you can read the entire story here:

 

How Latino voters will choose in 2012

By DeeDee Garcia Blase

(Featured in Guardian)

<snip>

So, looking to 2012 and the race for the GOP nomination, rather than fight about who can build the tallest electric fence, Republicans have a unique opportunity to win at least the 40% of the Hispanic vote they will need for the upcoming presidential election. GOP presidential candidates need political cover from those Republican senators and representatives who are in safe seats to take on the tough issue of immigration. Those who are secure in their districts (or states) should confront the dysfunctional immigration system head-on with reasonable proposals. After all, several state Republican lawmakers have complained that the immigration system is broken – and they attribute much of the blame to the federal government.

If federal lawmakers, particularly those from the Republican party, can demonstrate their ability to address a difficult issue in a rational way, it will only serve to benefit the economy. And all Americans stand to gain if, instead of having their tax burdens raised, new tax payers can be found and nurtured. Millions of dollars are currently wasted on detaining undocumented immigrants who perform services as nannies, gardeners and fast food workers. Tax payer dollars should be spent smartly in pursuing only the undocumented who do harm to others. Republican lawmakers can win the message war – and Latino hearts – if they rely on the factual data from economists that shows how low-skilled immigrants do indeed help create more middle-class jobs for natives and contribute to the overall economy.

There is one problem which the GOP has that prevents this from happening – and his name is Lamar Smith. While it is true that Obama is deporting record numbers of immigrants, the Texas congressman penned an op-ed recently that claimed misleadingly that the administration is artificially inflating its deportation numbers. Smith, meanwhile, continues to push for enforcement-only policies through big-government, bureaucratic methods like the E-Verify program and the prison system.

<snip>

The Republican party must learn the lesson of the Reid/Angle election – particularly in the US southwest where Latinos are registering themselves in droves. If Obama does in 2012 what Reid did at the last minute in 2010 in order to woo Latinos to go to the polls, Republicans will rue the day they threw away millions of vital votes.

“Urgent” phone call from The Heritage Foundation – Libertad

I received an “urgent” phone call from The Heritage Foundation’s new  leader of a project called “Libertad”.  They heard there was a buzz about us because we have received national recognition (newspapers) across the country  due to our being the largest and fastest growing Hispanic Republican grassroots organization now in all key states with high Latino population.

Israel Ortega wanted us to stop referring to The Heritage Foundation in the SOMOS REPUBLICANS “About Us” section, after finding out that we were in support of the DREAM Act, and Immigration Reform with the idea that we can secure our borders through reform.  Apparently that made them uncomfortable so we decided to re-read their own memo and recommendation to President Obama and President Calderon, and we discovered that their recommendation to the President is also our recommendation.

Their attempt in reaching out to the Latino community will fall on deaf ears because we will inform all other grassroots leaders of how they called our Texas State Director, Lauro Garza and our Oklahoma State Director only to tell us later on to stop referring to them in the SOMOS REPUBLICANS “About Us” Section.

Update 12/14/10:

Apparently, our blog is more effective than we believe.  After we complained about The Heritage Foundation, they apologized to us for the mis-communication and we respect them for that.  We thank them for their apology and we appreciate their leadership.

Even though we do not agree with The Heritage Foundation on the DREAM Act, and even though we are appalled that The Heritage Foundation allows former attorney Kris Kobach to write for them, SOMOS REPUBLICANS will continue to address our community needs and concerns.

Hispanic Republicans Demand That Sharron Angle Pull Her Atrocious Anti-Hispanic Ad Now

MEDIA ADVISORY

Hispanic Republicans Demand That Sharron Angle Pull Her Anti-Hispanic Ad Now

For Immediate Release
October 30, 2010

Phoenix, AZ – Southwestern Hispanic Republicans are demanding that Sharron Angle pull her grossly indecent anti-Hispanic ads from her campaign.  If Sharron Angle wants to attack Harry Reid, she should do so but not by painting Hispanics as bad members of society.  Her ad depicting immigrants as criminals is outrageous and spectacularly ill-conceived.  Her anti-Hispanic ads are not only atrocious, but absolutely disrespectful to the Latino community.

Angle’s use of these ads perpetuates a misleading perception, and it appears she cannot separate myth from reality.  In fact, data shows that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born individuals.

We believe that Angle’s ads are a direct attack on our community, and instead she should be attacking Harry Reid.  We demand that she pull her anti-Hispanic ads that are on the verge of racism, and she should govern herself accordingly.

Anti-Hispanic rhetoric and behavior will only prevent the growth of the Republican Party in the Southwest.  We hope Latinos exercise their right to vote in the United States on November 2, 2010.

Will Mormon President, Thomas Monson, Respond to Divisive Nature of Russell Pearce?

On the 28th of September, 2010, we wrote Mormon President, Thomas Monson, this letter with regard to the the divisiveness of Russell Pearce who is also a member of the Mormon community.   We wanted to raise attention to Mr. Monson of the ongoing divide (specifically in Mesa, Arizona) that some Mormon Anglos and Latinos are experiencing within the Mormon community.

We know that the Mormon Chuch has taken a political stance with regard to pro life issues, the gay agenda, and so forth — so naturally we would like to see the President of the Mormon Church take a firm political stance with regard to the treatment of the undocumented immigrants.

We hope that the President of the Mormon church will respond before October 28, 2010 — which marks the anniversary of the Mormon Extermination Order of Missouri.  And, we hope he will communicate to their faithful in Mesa, Arizona, that Russell Pearce’s stance and treatment towards Hispanic immigrants is evil.

The atmosphere in Mesa, Arizona is a venomous one. The time for the President of the Mormon Church to act is now, and we hope to hear from him Thomas before the 28th of October.

The 2010 Hispanic-unfriendly & Hispanic-friendly Candidate List

Phoenix, AZ — Southwestern Hispanic Republicans have compiled a list of political candidates who are perceived as unfriendly towards the Hispanic community for election year 2010. There is a need for Hispanics to determine where candidates stand on issues that are near and dear to our hearts: immigration and children. The base of our organization and our volunteers want to know where 2010 candidates in the Southwest stand on SB 1070, legislation related to the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution, the DREAM Act, and similar laws that impact our family units.

Germany returns to history & against multiculturalism

It looks like the re-emergence is becoming more evident.

Germany depends on Russia, Russia needs labor, so will Russia rely on Germany investment?  The Chancellor’s remarks are now out in the open after 65 years of silence.

By George Friedman

German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared at an Oct. 16 meeting of young members of her party, the Christian Democratic Union, that multiculturalism, or Multikulti, as the Germans put it, “has failed totally.” Horst Seehofer, minister-president of Bavaria and the chairman of a sister party to the Christian Democrats, said at the same meeting that the two parties were “committed to a dominant German culture and opposed to a multicultural one.” Merkel also said that the flood of immigrants is holding back the German economy, although Germany does need more highly trained specialists, as opposed to the laborers who have sought economic advantages in Germany.

The statements were striking in their bluntness and their willingness to speak of a dominant German culture, a concept that for obvious reasons Germans have been sensitive about asserting since World War II. The statement should be taken with utmost seriousness and considered for its social and geopolitical implications. It should also be considered in the broader context of Europe’s response to immigration, not to Germany’s response alone.

The Origins of the German Immigration Question

Let’s begin with the origins of the problem. Post-World War II Germany faced a severe labor shortage for two reasons: a labor pool depleted by the devastating war — and by Soviet prisoner-of-war camps — and the economic miracle that began on the back of revived industry in the 1950s. Initially, Germany was able to compensate by admitting ethnic Germans fleeing Central Europe and Communist East Germany. But the influx only helped assuage the population loss from World War II. Germany needed more labor to feed its burgeoning export-based industry, and in particular more unskilled laborers for manufacturing, construction and other industries.

To resolve the continuing labor shortage, Germany turned to a series of successive labor recruitment deals, first with Italy (1955). After labor from Italy dried up due to Italy’s own burgeoning economy, Germany turned to Spain (1960), Greece (1960), Turkey (1961) and then Yugoslavia (1968). Labor recruitment led to a massive influx of “Gastarbeiter,” German for “guest workers,” into German society. The Germans did not see this as something that would change German society: They regarded the migrants as temporary labor, not as immigrants in any sense. As the term implied, the workers were guests and would return to their countries of origin when they were no longer needed (many Spaniards, Italians and Portuguese did just this). This did not particularly trouble the Germans, who were primarily interested in labor.

The Germans simply didn’t expect this to be a long-term issue. They did not consider how to assimilate these migrants, a topic that rarely came up in policy discussions. Meanwhile, the presence of migrant labor allowed millions of Germans to move from unskilled labor to white-collar jobs during the 1960s.

An economic slowdown in 1966 and full-on recession following the oil shock of 1973 changed labor conditions in Germany. Germany no longer needed a steady stream of unskilled labor and actually found itself facing mounting unemployment among migrants already in country, leading to the “Anwerbestopp,” German for “labor recruitment stop,” in 1973.

Nonetheless, the halt in migration did not resolve the fact that guest workers already were in Germany in great numbers, migrants who now wanted to bring in family members. The 1970s saw most migration switch to “family reunions” and, when the German government moved to close that loophole, asylum. As the Italians, Spanish and Portuguese returned home to tend to their countries’ own successive economic miracles, Muslim Turks became the overwhelming majority of migrants in Germany — particularly as asylum seekers flocked into Germany, most of whom were not fleeing any real government retribution. It did not help that Germany had particularly open asylum laws in large part due to guilt over the Holocaust, a loophole Turkish migrants exploited en masse following the 1980 coup d’etat in Turkey.

As the migrants transformed from a temporary exigency to a multigenerational community, the Germans had to confront the problem. At base, they did not want the migrants to become part of Germany. But if they were to remain in the country, Berlin wanted to make sure the migrants became loyal to Germany. The onus on assimilating migrants into the larger society increased as Muslim discontent rocked Europe in the 1980s. The solution Germans finally agreed upon in the mid-to-late 1980s was multiculturalism, a liberal and humane concept that offered migrants a grand bargain: Retain your culture but pledge loyalty to the state.

In this concept, Turkish immigrants, for example, would not be expected to assimilate into German culture. Rather, they would retain their own culture, including language and religion, and that culture would coexist with German culture. Thus, there would be a large number of foreigners, many of whom could not speak German and by definition did not share German and European values.

While respecting diversity, the policy seemed to amount to buying migrant loyalty. The deeper explanation was that the Germans did not want, and did not know how, to assimilate culturally, linguistically, religiously and morally diverse people. Multiculturalism did not so much represent respect for diversity as much as a way to escape the question of what it meant to be German and what pathways foreigners would follow to become Germans.

Two Notions of Nation

This goes back to the European notion of the nation, which is substantially different from the American notion. For most of its history, the United States thought of itself as a nation of immigrants, but with a core culture that immigrants would have to accept in a well-known multicultural process. Anyone could become an American, so long as they accepted the language and dominant culture of the nation. This left a lot of room for uniqueness, but some values had to be shared. Citizenship became a legal concept. It required a process, an oath and shared values. Nationality could be acquired; it had a price.

To be French, Polish or Greek meant not only that you learned their respective language or adopted their values — it meant that you were French, Polish or Greek because your parents were, as were their parents. It meant a shared history of suffering and triumph. One couldn’t acquire that.

For the Europeans, multiculturalism was not the liberal and humane respect for other cultures that it pretended to be. It was a way to deal with the reality that a large pool of migrants had been invited as workers into the country. The offer of multiculturalism was a grand bargain meant to lock in migrant loyalty in exchange for allowing them to keep their culture — and to protect European culture from foreign influences by sequestering the immigrants. The Germans tried to have their workers and a German identity simultaneously. It didn’t work.

Multiculturalism resulted in the permanent alienation of the immigrants. Having been told to keep their own identity, they did not have a shared interest in the fate of Germany. They identified with the country they came from much more than with Germany. Turkey was home. Germany was a convenience. It followed that their primary loyalty was to their home and not to Germany. The idea that a commitment to one’s homeland culture was compatible with a political loyalty to the nation one lived in was simplistic. Things don’t work that way. As a result, Germany did not simply have an alien mass in its midst: Given the state of affairs between the Islamic world and the West, at least some Muslim immigrants were engaged in potential terrorism.

Multiculturalism is profoundly divisive, particularly in countries that define the nation in European terms, e.g., through nationality. What is fascinating is that the German chancellor has chosen to become the most aggressive major European leader to speak out against multiculturalism. Her reasons, political and social, are obvious. But it must also be remembered that this is Germany, which previously addressed the problem of the German nation via the Holocaust. In the 65 years since the end of World War II, the Germans have been extraordinarily careful to avoid discussions of this issue, and German leaders have not wanted to say things such as being committed to a dominant German culture. We therefore need to look at the failure of multiculturalism in Germany in another sense, namely, with regard to what is happening in Germany.

Simply put, Germany is returning to history. It has spent the past 65 years desperately trying not to confront the question of national identity, the rights of minorities in Germany and the exercise of German self-interest. The Germans have embedded themselves in multinational groupings like the European Union and NATO to try to avoid a discussion of a simple and profound concept: nationalism. Given what they did last time the matter came up, they are to be congratulated for their exercise of decent silence. But that silence is now over.

The Re-emergence of German Nation Awareness

Two things have forced the re-emergence of German national awareness. The first, of course, is the immediate issue — a large and indigestible mass of Turkish and other Muslim workers. The second is the state of the multinational organizations to which Germany tried to confine itself. NATO, a military alliance consisting mainly of countries lacking militaries worth noting, is moribund. The second is the state of the European Union. After the Greek and related economic crises, the certainties about a united Europe have frayed. Germany now sees itself as shaping EU institutions so as not to be forced into being the European Union’s ultimate financial guarantor. And this compels Germany to think about Germany beyond its relations with Europe.

It is impossible for Germany to reconsider its position on multiculturalism without, at the same time, validating the principle of the German nation. Once the principle of the nation exists, so does the idea of a national interest. Once the national interest exists, Germany exists in the context of the European Union only as what Goethe termed an “elective affinity.” What was a certainty amid the Cold War now becomes an option. And if Europe becomes an option for Germany, then not only has Germany re-entered history, but given that Germany is the leading European power, the history of Europe begins anew again.

This isn’t to say that Germany must follow any particular foreign policy given its new official view on multiculturalism; it can choose many paths. But an attack on multiculturalism is simultaneously an affirmation of German national identity. You can’t have the first without the second. And once that happens, many things become possible.

Consider that Merkel made clear that Germany needed 400,000 trained specialists. Consider also that Germany badly needs workers of all sorts who are not Muslims living in Germany, particularly in view of Germany’s demographic problems. If Germany can’t import workers for social reasons, it can export factories, call centers, medical analysis and IT support desks. Not far to the east is Russia, which has a demographic crisis of its own but nonetheless has spare labor capacity due to its reliance on purely extractive natural resources for its economy. Germany already depends on Russian energy. If it comes to rely on Russian workers, and in turn Russia comes to rely on German investment, then the map of Europe could be redrawn once again and European history restarted at an even greater pace.

Merkel’s statement is therefore of enormous importance on two levels. First, she has said aloud what many leaders already know, which is that multiculturalism can become a national catastrophe. Second, in stating this, she sets in motion other processes that could have a profound impact on not only Germany and Europe but also the global balance of power. It is not clear at this time what her intention is, which may well be to boost her center-right coalition government’s abysmal popularity. But the process that has begun is neither easily contained nor neatly managed. All of Europe, indeed, much of the world, is coping with the struggle between cultures within their borders. But the Germans are different, historically and geographically. When they begin thinking these thoughts, the stakes go up.

Read more: Germany and the Failure of Multiculturalism | STRATFOR

Who shot the sheriff? Did Sheriff Paul Babeu speak too soon?

This is getting crazier and crazier.  From the Phoenix New Times:

Pinalcchio: Renowned Forensics Experts Say a Pinal County Deputy’s High-Profile Tale About Getting Shot After Encountering Drug Smugglers Doesn’t Add Up

“I can’t speak for our sheriff [Paul Babeu],” Dave Hausman says, “but I can speak for our unit, and the sheriff can slap me later if need be.

“But I think there’s a lot of confusion that [Arizona Senate Bill] 1070 and what happened to Louie Puroll are intimately related. What happened out in [the] Vekol Valley was a criminal enterprise. Louie was looking at guys carrying drugs, whether they were illegal immigrants, citizens of the United States, or, in the darkest of dark realms, dirty cops or bad firemen.

“It’s not about illegal immigration in that shooting. In that crime scene, it’s about criminals shooting a cop. It was about one of our deputies who was fighting crime, for lack of a better Superman term, and got involved in a situation that was about crime. It was about smuggling drugs into the United States.”

Hausman, an 18-year veteran of the south-central Arizona sheriff’s office, supervised his agency’s criminal investigation of the shooting.

The case thrust Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu into the national spotlight as a ubiquitous naysayer on the subject of the federal government and undocumented aliens, and it further polarized a citizenry already splintered by the illegal immigration issue.

The incident happened a week after Governor Jan Brewer signed S.B. 1070, Arizona’s contentious anti-immigration law, and a month after Cochise County rancher Rob Krentz was gunned down on his cattle ranch, possibly by an illegal alien, in a still-unsolved murder (“Cowboy Down,” June 10).

Deputy Puroll told investigators he was on a routine one-man patrol that April afternoon in the desert about an hour’s drive south of downtown Phoenix and 85 miles from the Mexican border.

The 53-year-old officer said he was on a hill south of Interstate 8 when he spotted five or six men (Latino or Native American, he wasn’t sure) walking north on a dirt trail below him. He said all but one were lugging large backpacks that he suspected held marijuana but that he hadn’t seen any weapons as they passed by.

Puroll said he kept a safe distance as he followed the crew north for more than a mile across the rugged mountainous terrain. He said he stopped for a few minutes as the smugglers disappeared from sight over a ridge near Antelope Peak.

The search-and-rescue deputy said he, too, then stepped over the rise.

He knew from experience what was on the other side: a narrow, downhill wash dominated by shady mesquite trees and heaps of trash left behind by passersby — most of them undocumented.

Immediately after Puroll crested the ridge, he said, he ran smack into the guys he was tailing.

He said one of the men shot at him from about 25 yards “directly in front of me” with a powerful AK-47 assault rifle. That first shot, Puroll said, grazed his left flank a few inches above a kidney.

The deputy avoided further injury and retreated to safety, he said, after several more shots by a second smuggler missed their mark.

Puroll called 911 from his cell phone at 4:04 p.m.

Seven more shots rang out in rapid succession before the deputy said a word to the dispatcher.

Puroll immediately gave his GPS location, apparently reading from a handheld device. He then yelled, “Triple 9s!” the universal police code for an officer in trouble and needing help.

“I’m taking fire! Get me some help! Send Ranger [a helicopter]! I’ve been hit! I’ve been hit! I’ve been hit!”

Dozens of police officers immediately headed toward the remote vicinity , and records show some arrived near the junction of I-8 and State Route 84 within about 20 minutes. The intensive manhunt would include about 200 cops from local, state, tribal, and federal agencies.

Four helicopters began their search for the deputy and his assailants well within an hour.

But the “smugglers” escaped apprehension, and the packs that supposedly were filled with dope also vanished with them.

An Arizona Department of Public Safety chopper pilot airlifted Puroll out of the desert about 5:20 p.m., 80 minutes after the 911 call. The deputy was treated at the Casa Grande Regional Medical Center and released a few hours later.

Two of the helicopters were equipped with night-vision technology that detects temperature differences of objects such as vehicles and people. Pilots continued in vain to search for the supposed attackers that night.

Within a day, authorities had detained about 70 suspected illegal immigrants over an expanse far beyond the Vekol Valley. Pinal County authorities expressed hope that three “persons of interest” — undocumented aliens ensnared in the desert manhunt — would help break the case.

But they didn’t, and the trio were turned over to immigration authorities for deportation.

The timing of the desert shooting couldn’t have been better for Sheriff Babeu — “ironic,” one of his lieutenants says, tongue not in cheek.

Prensa Latina Las Vegas lists Somos Republicans in support of DREAM Act

Very cool.  Of course we are for DREAM.  So is the Department of Defense since Bush was in office.  Y que?

Una gran cantidad de organizaciones religiosas, cívicas y comunitarias han expresado su apoyo a la aprobación del proyecto de ley DREAM (en inglés, DREAM Act). A continuación, un listado de algunas de estas organizaciones que han vociferado apoyo a esta importante legislación.

Department of Defense: “Pentagon officials support the Dream Act. In its strategic plan for fiscal years 2010-2012, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness cited the Dream Act as a “smart” way to attract quality recruits to the all-volunteer force.” [Wall Street Journal “A Route to Citizenship in Defense Bill,” 9/18/10]

Colin Powell, former Secretary of State: “Our minorities are not getting educated well enough now. Fifty percent of our minority kids are not finishing high school. We’ve got to invest in education. We should use the DREAM Act as one way to do it. Whether it should be part of the defense bill or not is something the Congress will decide.” [Interview with NBC’s Meet the Press, 9/19/10]

Louis Caldera, former Secretary of the Army: “The DREAM Act will materially expand the pool of individuals qualified, ready and willing to serve their country in uniform… I have no doubt many of these enlistees will be among the best soldiers in our Army.” [The Hill “The Senate should approve the DREAM Act now,” 9/20/10]

National Council of La Raza: “The ‘DREAM Act’ will help our country prevent the loss of another generation of young people who stand to contribute to the economic, social, and national security interests of the nation.” [National Council of La Raza Statement, 9/15/10]

United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce: “This bill does not reward breaking the law, instead it rewards the principles our country was founded upon – family, hard work and perseverance” [United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Statement, 9/20/10]

Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund: “The DREAM Act would permit our nation to benefit from the energy and brainpower of United States-educated students who have the education and training to perform at a high level in the well-trained workforce upon which our nation’s successful future depends.” [Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund Statement, 9/17/10]

Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration: “The DREAM Act is bipartisan legislation that enables high-achieving young people – immigrants who have been raised in the United States, have worked hard in school, and then pursue higher education or serve in the United States Armed Forces – to achieve the American Dream.” [Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration 9/17/10]

Immigration Policy Center: “The DREAM Act would eliminate these barriers for many students, and the DREAM Act’s high school graduation requirement would provide a powerful incentive for students who might otherwise drop out to stay in school and graduate.” [Immigration Policy Center Statement, 9/15/10]

Reform Immigration for America: “The DREAM Act would benefit a defined group of talented young people who are Americans in all but paperwork.” [Reform Immigration for America Letter to Senator Harry Reid, 7/22/10]

America’s Voice: “The young people who would be affected by DREAM’s passage are Americans in all but paperwork, embody the core values of our nation, and deserve the chance to pursue their own versions of the American dream. “ [America’s Voice Statement, 9/14/10]

Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities: “The act puts deserving and hard-working young people who attend college or join the military on the path to U.S. citizenship.” [Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities Statement, 9/15/10]

NAFSA: Association of International Educators: “All children should have the opportunity to develop their talents and gifts, and that includes immigrant children in the United States.” [Letter to Senator Reid, 9/16/10]

National Latino Congreso: “The DREAM Act will remove barriers to higher education for thousands of young students who have grown up in this country, attended our schools and have the desire and capacity to make vital contributions to the nation’s economic strength and security.” [National Latino Congreso Action Alert, 9/20/10]

National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials: “The DREAM Act will strengthen our economy and society by enabling thousands of students to pursue opportunities in college, the military or trade schools.” [National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Statement, 9/20/10]

National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum: “The DREAM Act provides a path to citizenship for youth brought to this country as children, and gives them a renewed opportunity to achieve their hopes and dreams, for the benefit of our entire society.” [National Asian American Pacific American Women’s Forum Statement, 9/17/10]

Hispanic National Bar Association: “The HNBA believes that passage of this DREAM Act is a win-win proposition, and a step in the right direction towards the overall goal of comprehensive reform of our immigration law” [Hispanic National Bar Association Statement, 9/15/10]

League of United Latin American Citizens: “This bill will allow thousands of eligible high school graduates and highly qualified recruits to enroll in the U.S. armed forces and higher education.” [League of United Latin American Citizens Action Alert, 9/16/10]

Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together: “The DREAM Act is an important bill that deserves our support and should be passed; it addresses an important component of our immigration system that is broken and does not work well for America.” [Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together, 9/20/10]

Democracia Ahora: “It is unconscionable that we as a nation built by the toil and talent of immigrants from across the globe would deny citizenship to bright young men and women who were brought to the United States and inherited their undocumented status through no fault of their own.” [Democracia Ahora Statement, 9/16/10]

National Hispanic Leadership Agenda: “The DREAM Act would create a path to legalization for those undocumented individuals who were brought to the U.S. as children and have since proven their commitment to our country by serving in our armed forces or excelling in academia.” [National Hispanic Leadership Agenda Letter to Members of Congress, 9/17/10]

Somos Republicans: “Military experts agree that the DREAM Act promises to enlarge dramatically the pool of highly qualified recruits for the United States Armed Forces and the Department of Defense has expressed support for the DREAM Act since the Bush administration.” [Somos Republicans Letter to Senator Reid, 9/17/10]

National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health: “Educational attainment is one way that Latinas can have access to information, resources and services that will help them make informed and autonomous decisions.” [National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health Statement, 9/16/10]

Asian American Center for Advancing Justice: “Passage of the DREAM Act would not only enable these young people, who grew up here and work hard, the chance to achieve the American Dream, but to also be productive, equal members of our society.” [Asian American Center for Advancing Justice Action Alert, 9/17/10]

American Council on Education: “The DREAM Act is an important tool for achieving our national goal of returning the United States to world leadership in higher education attainment.” [American Council on Education Letter to Senate Leadership, 9/17/10]

Episcopal Church: “Giving Children the Opportunity to Pursue Their Dreams Is Part Our Tradition and Values That Define Us As Americans.” [Episcopal Church Letter to Members of Congress, 9/17/10]

United Methodist Church: “Passage of the DREAM Act is one important step towards the just and humane reform the broken immigration system needs.” [General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church Letter to Members of Congress, September 2010]

United Church of Christ: “This is a desperately needed legislation that will allow an Entire Generation of Children to Have a Future.” [United Church of Christ Letter to Members of Congress, 9/14/10]

Church World Service: “The fundamental question posed by the DREAM Act is whether our country will uphold equality and justice for children who find themselves without access to education and employment.” [Church World Service Letter to Members of Congress, 9/14/10]

Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service: “The students who will benefit from the DREAM Act should have the opportunity to continue to pursue their education.” [Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service Letter to Senator Reid, 9/15/10]

Cardinal Roger Mahony, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles: “The DREAM Act is not amnesty. Rather, it is the recognition that in our midst are many young people who only know one country: the United States. And they want to contribute to building up our country.” [Cardinal Roger Mahony Blogs L.A., 9/15/10]

NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby: “Not only is the DREAM Act good for our self-interest as a nation, it is also a viable way toward creating a just immigration policy for the 21st Century.” [NETWORK Letter to Senator Harry Reid, 9/17/10]

Rev. Luis Cortés, Esperanza: “The DREAM Act is compassionate and just and would fix a small part of our disastrous immigration system.” [Statement to Hispanic pastors, 9/20/10]

Undocumented Want Chance to Join Military

Undocumented Want Chance to Join Military

Updated: Thursday, 16 Sep 2010, 7:13 PM MDT
Published : Thursday, 16 Sep 2010, 6:38 PM MDT

• By ALEX SAVIDGE
  FOX 10 News

PHOENIX – The Dream Act will grant legal status to illegal immigrants who either attend college or join the military.

They’re undocumented, but want a chance to join the service and fight for this country. On Thursday, they took their message to Arizona’s senior senator.

With his diploma in hand, 21-year-old Michael Nazario marched into Senator John McCain’s office in Phoenix and made a pitch for the Dream Act.

“I would like Senator McCain to vote for the Department of Defense authorization bill,” said Nazario.

Attached to that defense bill is the Dream Act, which would allow undocumented immigrants like Nazario to gain legal status by serving in the military.

“I want to be part of that too, I’ve trained..I’m a leader and I just want an opportunity to serve,” he said.

Outside McCain’s office, a group of dreamers protested with signs.

A 23-year-old man named Celso says he wants to join the Marines, but can’t because he’s not legal.

“For me, I’ve always grown up an American and I would be willing to fight for this country,” he said.

When asked if he would die for it, Celso said, “If it came to it, yes.”

On Thursday, Senator McCain made it clear he will fight to stop the defense spending bill that includes the Dream Act.

These undocumented immigrants want McCain to know how much they’re dedicated to this country and ready to serve.

“We really hope he rethinks this leadership on this..because he used to be a champion for the Dream Act,” said Celso.

Several years ago, McCain co-sponsored the Dream Act, but now Republicans say it’s not right to introduce it in a defense bill.

The Senate is expected to take a vote next week and Dream Act studnts are expected to travel to Washington, D.C. to make their voices heard.

Letter to Senator Harry Reid on DREAM/DOD Amendment

Hello!

Some of you are probably wondering why a Republican organization like ourselves would want to have dialogue with Harry Reid’s office. The DREAM Act (as it relates to the Department of Defense goals) is important to us. We believe that anyone who serves our country and puts their lives on the line to protect the United States Constitution is worthy of a path towards citizenship to become an American.

This particular issue pertains to our youth. This is the time where we should put party politics aside to become bipartisan and work towards a statesman-like resolve. Below is our letter to Reid’s office and we hope you will also write him a letter of support.

17 September 2010

The Honorable Harry Reid
Attention:  Angela Arboleda
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

SUBJECT: The Department of Defense Strategic Plan for fiscal years 2010-2012

Dear Senator Reid:

I would like to thank you for bringing attention to the DREAM Act/Department of Defense amendment, specifically as it relates to tens of thousands of highly qualified young people who would be able to enlist into the Armed Forces if the DREAM Act becomes law.

As a female veteran of the United States Air Force, I believe that the undocumented who volunteer to serve our country honorably should be given a path towards citizenship.  Throughout my military career, I have met and had the honor of serving with fellow Hispanics who were from other Latin countries, and who put their lives on the line and earned their citizenship.

In recent years, the Army has been forced to accept more applicants who are high school dropouts, have low scores on ASVAB, and have criminal backgrounds.  However, the DREAM Act would allow recruiters to seek highly qualified high school students with no criminal background.

Military experts agree that the DREAM Act promises to enlarge dramatically the pool of highly qualified recruits for the United States Armed Forces and the Department of Defense has expressed support for the DREAM Act since the Bush administration.

I urge you to work with fellow Senators who have served our Armed Forces and remind those Senators of the immigrants they served with.  I believe the world has become more dangerous — we have countries such as North Korea and Iran who have promised to increase their nuclear arsenal.  Because of this, we should have as a very high goal to surpass all Department of Defense and military goals as it relates to recruitment and the quality of those recruits.

Kind regards,

DeeDee  Blase
Founder, Somos Republicans

Next Page »