Karen Ocamb

LA County Votes to Boycott Arizona After Public Hearing with Gay Testimony

Filed By Karen Ocamb | June 04, 2010 1:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics, Politics
Tags: Arizona, LA County, LGBT community, LGBT politics, Los Angeles

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors heard hours of contentious public testimony Tuesday before voting 3 to 2 to boycott Arizona over LA County Board of SupsSB 1070, the state's controversial "Papers, please" illegal immigration law that requires law enforcement to ask anyone they "suspect" of being an "illegal alien" to produce documented proof of American citizenship.

LA County joins a growing list of California cities and organization opposing the Arizona law, including West Hollywood, Santa Ana, LA City, Pasadena, Santa Monica, and El Monte. The decision is significant since it is believed that if LA County were a nation, its GDP (Gross Domestic Product) would rank among the 20 largest countries in the world.

The motion, brought by Supervisors Gloria Molina and Zev Yaroslavsky (this photo shows Supervisors Mike Antonovich, Don Knabe, Gloria Molina, Mark Ridley-Thomas, Zev Yaroslavsky) not only calls for a boycott of Country business travel - but also calls for divestiture of all County investments, in effect treating Arizona like South Africa in the days of apartheid. The motion, which also keeps the ban in place until SB 1070 is suspended or repealed, reads in part:

"There is no question that our national immigration system is broken, and that individuals and communities throughout the nation are struggling to deal with the Federal government's failure to enact and enforce a fair and BOS illegal-immigrant-signworkable immigration law. But a broken system does not justify a break with our most cherished Constitutional laws and principles--principles that specifically prohibit singling out identifiable groups of people for harassment, intimidation and potential arrest solely on the basis of the color of their skin, race, ethnicity, speech or cultural attributes. Unfortunately, this is what Arizona's recently-passed SB 1070, as amended, will do.

Arizona's SB 1070 simply goes too far and should be strongly condemned and universally rejected. It sends a strong message to all immigrants to avoid contact with any law enforcement officer, aggressively discouraging witnesses and victims from reporting crimes, and making the entire community less safe.

Also, it diverts scarce resources away from law enforcement. It deters individuals from seeking and obtaining needed emergency and medical care, including services to screen and treat communicable diseases.

As stewards of the resources generated by all of our residents, it is the prerogative of this Board to direct our County resources, business practices and investments in ways that do not directly or indirectly provide practical support for this law."

Arizona Gov. Brewer

The vote directs the Chief Executive Officer to immediately take several actions, including: send a letter to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and Arizona leadership "calling for the indefinite suspension or immediate repeal of this legislation;" suspend all County business travel to the state, unless it would harm County interests, adding that the ban will only be lifted with the suspension or repeal of SB 1070; review with the Treasurer and Tax Collector all County investments in Arizona securities such as State or municipal bonds "and, to the extent practicable and in accordance with their fiduciary duties, adopt policies of divestment and future non-investment in such Arizona securities."

The Board directed the CEO and County Counsel to figure out how to terminate all existing contracts with Arizona-based or headquartered companies" and report back in two weeks. The auditor-controller told the LA Times that the "county has spent about $122 million over the past five years on Arizona goods and services. Treasurer-Tax Collector Mark Saladino said the county had no commercial paper or investments that would be affected by the boycott."

BOS Mike portraitIn a statement last week, Supervisor Mike Anotonvich called the proposed boycott "irresponsible," saying:

"A divestment and a boycott is a disingenuous show of perceived political correctness that will only backfire and will shoot us in the heart -- not in the foot. The fiscal impact of terminating contracts with Arizona would harm our already fragile economic condition of this county and add to our double-digit unemployment rolls.

Arizona supplies Los Angeles County with water and energy as well as jobs and opportunities to our residents who work in those businesses and institutions visited by Arizona residents."

In a press release distributed last Friday, Antonovich provided figures from the Department of Public Social Services showing that "in April 2010, $52 million in welfare benefits ($22 million CalWORKs + $30 million in Food Stamps) were issued to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their native-born children in Los Angeles County. This amounts to approximately 23% of all CalWORKs and Food Stamp issuances in the County. In 2009, CalWORKs and Food Stamp issuances to illegals totaled nearly $570 million."

Antonovich said:

"When you add this to $540 million for public safety and nearly $500 million for healthcare, the total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers far exceeds $1 billion a year - not including the hundreds of millions of dollars for education."

(In his May 15 budget, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called for the elimination of the CalWorks Program) In his proposed budget released May 25, Assembly Speaker John A. Perez keeps CalWorks intact.)

While Antonovich focused on the fiscal impact of illegal immigration, looking for "solutions, not boycotts," most of the heated testimony during the public hearing Tuesday broke down along essentially two lines: a wide spectrum of civil rights and workers advocates who believe the law is unjust and unconstitutional and SB 1070 supporters who identify illegal immigrants with violent LA gangs.

Particularly passionate were family of Jamiel Shaw II, who the LA Times reports was "a football player who was recruited by Stanford and Rutgers before he was gunned down in 2008, allegedly by Pedro Espinoza. A member of the 18th Street gang in the U.S. illegally, prosecutors say, Espinoza had been released from jail a day before the shooting after serving time for an earlier offense."

BOS GloriaMolina set the tone for the hearing, which was often interrupted with applause, boos and other disruptions. Molina said:

"This is a motion that's not just symbolic, it is really meant to send a very strong message, a strong message that while we respect and certainly understand Arizona's frustration, this law simply goes too far. Arizona's law has serious and nationwide implications."

Molina said she concurred with LA County Sheriff Lee Baca and LAPD Chief Charlie Beck that the law, when implemented, will send a message to many in the immigrant community to avoid all contact with law enforcement and "at the end of the day, many in our communities are going to be less safe."

Molina also believes that the new law "will lead to harassment, intimidation and of course, racial profiling....I, as a County Supervisor, have sworn an oath to defend our Constitution and all I can say is I believe Arizona's law is unconstitutional" and directly or indirectly, LA County shouldn't be supporting it.

Lambda Legal Proyecto Igualdad Coordinator Francisco Duenas talked about the impact the law might have on LGBTS. Here is his entire testimony:

Good afternoon and thank you, Members of the Board of Supervisors. I am Francisco Dueñas and I am here representing Lambda Legal, the leading national legal defense organization for BOS - Lambda Franciscothe lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community and people living with HIV.

As LGBT people, we are all too familiar with being on the wrong side of unjust laws, discriminatory law enforcement, and a hostile and ineffective legal system. From our own advocacy work, we know too well that our country's immigration system remains plagued by these problems, and that many LGBT immigrants are forced to inhabit essentially a double closet - afraid of disclosing their sexual orientation and/or gender identity and afraid of disclosing that they are undocumented. Arizona's SB 1070 only compounds these dynamics in the worst possible ways.

After being detained and severely beaten by the Mexican police who, while calling him antigay names, threatened to kill him if they ever saw him again, Jorge Soto Vega fled to the United States. Yet, in 2003, Soto Vega's application for asylum was rejected by an immigration judge who said he thought Soto Vega didn't "appear gay" and could keep his sexual orientation hidden if he chose to.

Jorge eventually won asylum, but most LGBT undocumented immigrants do not even know asylum is available based on past antigay persecution and the one-year application deadline bars the asylum door for many. What is more, when immigrants are detained they are often held in remote jails with little or no access to their families or to attorneys and where they are all the more vulnerable to anti-LGBT abuse.

In May 2007, Victoria Arellano, a 23-year-old, HIV positive, transgender immigrant from Mexico, was held in a detention center in San Pedro after being arrested on a minor traffic charge. Victoria, who did not exhibit any HIV symptoms when first detained, died after two months of pleading with officials for basic medical attention.

Binational same-sex couples (including those who are legally married) are also victims of this unjust system because lesbian and gay U.S. citizens are denied the ability to sponsor a foreign-born spouse to immigrate lawfully, as thousands of heterosexual citizens do every year. California is home to the greatest number of these families, with over 36,000 around the country, many of whom are raising children.

Finally, LGBT undocumented immigrants often are deterred from seeking justice after being victims of hate crimes or anti-LGBT discrimination for fear of arrest or deportation.

As a result, injustices are left without remedy and future wrongdoing encouraged.

Arizona's SB 1070 does not even acknowledge - let alone address - these issues. Instead, it only ensures that more binational same-sex couples and their families will be torn apart, that LGBT undocumented immigrants will be pushed further into the closet, and that they will suffer even more abuse.

As a child of once-undocumented immigrants from Mexico, I know first hand the contributions and sacrifices that these families - my family - have made to be a part of this country. My family only could give of themselves fully as Americans once they could come out of that closet of the undocumented. LGBT undocumented families need the same. Our communities, our country, will be the better for it.

Patrick Rooney, radio host and organizer of a non-profit organization geared to Black men, had a different take on the Arizona law:

"I grew up in Alabama on a plantation at a time when laws were against Black Americans, not because we came into the country illegally, but because we were Black. And for anyone to say that what's happening in Arizona is a civil rights issue or racial profiling and to compare that to what we had to go through - is a liar and they'll use the Black Americans in order to get their agenda across. This is not about civil rights.

This is about illegals coming in. Arizona is under siege. ...Illegals are killing Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and others. They don't care about the color."

He went on to say that "godless liberals" don't care about the citizens of Arizona, they only want amnesty to get people to vote for the Democratic Party. "It's more about the vote than it is about the citizens."

BOS Mark Ridley ThomasSupervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas was caught between two opposing forces. But in the end, he voted to boycott Arizona. Here's the statement he issued afterwards:

"I have been a student and devotee of nonviolence for more than 30 years. The most fundamental tenet of nonviolence is non-cooperation with unjust laws and discriminatory practices. One of the time honored tactics of nonviolent direct action is the economic boycott. For this reason, my viewpoint, which has been shaped in large part by my many years of reflection and action in support of civil rights, compels me to support this resolution in an effort to bring an end to what I believe to be an unjust law. I vote aye in the hope that our action will help swiftly bring an end to this civil rights crisis and restore fairness under the law."

During the public hearing, Antonovich said:

"The motion is not a motion against civil rights or against the law and, as one of the speakers said, we're going to be stripping citizenship from citizens. How do you strip a citizenship from a person who is here illegally? They are not considered a citizen. That is not racial discrimination."

To which Molina replied:

"When someone says that this doesn't involved racial profiling, you only need to look at me to know that I am one of those individuals that I'm sure would have a heck of a tough time in Arizona. And I know that that's the way they will enforce the laws, unfortunately."

BOS - ZevBut, after noting that the Arizona law does nothing to "advance the objective of immigration reform at all," Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky noted that people of color are not the only ones potentially impacted by this new law:

"Since we do not have a national identification card system, and that the only way you can be identified is to prove that you are a citizen is to either have your birth certifiate or if you're a naturalized citizen, to have your naturalization papsers on your person - I dare say that not one of the five members of this Board of Supervisors - if we were approached by a law enforcement officer and asked to prove that we were a citizen - could do so.

[cut]

The nation that a law enforcement agency would be charged by state law of determining my legal status is very troubling. Its not just a Latino issue. It is not just a person of color issue. It's anybody. It's anybody whose name is Yaroslavsky or Antonovich - not just Molina or...Fujioka. Anybody whose name sounds foreign. Anybody who has an accent. Anybody who somehow conveys the idea that they weren't born here will be ripe for questioning. And I think that's really what's offended the sensibilities of so many people."

Yarsalvsky said the motion had nothing to do with where the County stands on immigration, saying that like so many others, his parents came from "the old country."

"But the notion that I get pulled over in Arizona and he asks for my driver's license and he sees my name and then I have to prove that I'm a citizen? That's nonsense. That's not American.

[cut]

Upholding the Constitution of the United States is not easy - it's hard. Because it's moments like this when your emails are running 100-1 against or 100 to 3 against - that's when you have to stand up and support the Constitution of the United States.

[cut]

I hope we never have to implement [the motion]. I hope that before the law goes into effect, that either Arizona will re-assess, reconsider their position, or that a court will strike it down. That's my hope. But if not, this is the way to go."


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.

I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!

Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.

Benito what you are saying is it is okay to enter into a house without the owners permission.Then to bolster the arguement some would say in the illegals defense but hey they mowed the lawn,took out the trash,did the dishes and cleaned up the house.But remember all this was done knowing you didn't have the owners permission.Illegal is illegal and Obama will not prevail on illegal immigration amnesty or reform as you might prefer to call it.The border must be secured,immigration law must be enforced and only then will Americans be satisfied.

I think it's interesting how Patrick Rooney tried to separate African-Americans from the serious injustices visited on them by the law of the majority, from the serious injustices of SB 1070. It's true that there are important differences, but that doesn't mean there are no significant parallels. This reminds me of the attempt to separate gay issues from LGBT/queer issues.

Who cares what it reminds you of? Your mental associations don't constitute an argument. That you assume that they do might answer your earlier question about smug jerkiness.

Wouldn't lamda legals time be better spent appealing the Mexican Government for better rights for their lgbt population then blaming the state of Arizona for it.You would be wise to realize that if Arizona decides to boycott California they'll win.Without the water and power that comes from Arizona, Califonia will be nothing.Although with it's fiscal problems one could argue that California is worth less than nothing.We have a border we have national sovereignity and the vast majority of Americans are for enforcing the law.That is what Arizona is doing.Rascist is saying that Mexican illegals are better than any other class of illegal immigrant and deserve special treatment simply because there are more of them.They chose to disrespect our laws and border and they must accept accountability for doing it.

I think that they are so morally sophisticated that they have figured out how to limit their boycott to secondary contracts and to exclude purchases of water and electrical power. Just as their highly sophisticated moral worldview allows them to continue doing business with Mexico, which has a vastly more draconian immigration law than AZ.

BTW, don't you love the clown who tries to tie illegal immigration with "LGBT" rights on the grounds that some illegals are "LGBT"? By that logic, every issue in the world is an "LGBT" issue, since "LGBTs" can be found in every group and subgroup in the world and therefore on both sides of every conceivable political issue. We need to find a lesbian ICE agent who was shot by an illegal human trafficker and then demand that all "LGBTs" support AZ.

I do wonder about the point amym brings up - does this boycott include utilities?

I don't know. I think this is one of the areas the CEO and County Counsel are looking at and hence the caveat of "except where it might harm the County."

Water, for instance, is a big issue.

We'll see in two weeks.

How does one tell an illegal person from one who is not illegal? Is there a big red "I" stamped on their foreheads? Do they go around with signs saying they don't belong in this country? What about illegal Canadians? Illegal Somalians? Illegal Norwegians? One would be naive to think that the only illegal people come from Mexico . . . EVEN in Arizona. Some become illegal when their visas runs out.

So, since there is no way to actually tell who is really illegal without harassing ALL Hispanics, then Sheriff Joe's boys will have a field day when the law goes into affect. They will be violating the 4th Amendment of the Bill of Rights as if it was say . . . Nazi Germany? (Sheriff Joe has been seen laughing and joking with known Neo-Nazis in AZ.) No matter how the redneck White Sepremists of Arizona (and I include some of my own family in this, including my mother) want to argue for this stupid law, they are wrong.

If my yard has weeds, then I try to find a proven weed killer that doesn't harm the grass. This law is nothing more than a bargain-basement weed killer that will take out the lawn as well. That was the intention of the Arizona legislators and Governor all along; erasing the Hispanic history and heritage of Arizona. Banning racial studies in school is another step in that direction.

Regan DuCasse | June 5, 2010 3:39 PM

The gay community is making a grave mistake getting in bed with protesting SB 1070. Although there is sympathy for the kind of stealth lives that illegal immigrants lead, and certainly bi national gay couples risk separation because they can't marry or sponsor each other...is beside the point.
They ARE separate issues.

Illegal immigration is a matter of displacement, fraud and cheating a process that's essential for efficiency and responsibility.
Of all the illegal immigrants who are gay, the vast majority of them, are not.
We are also a nation with limited industry, jobs, resources and infrastructure. Considering our economic crisis right now, even LEGAL immigration poses risks to citizens who must compete for jobs as well.

This isn't about one's sexual orientation, which displaces no one, but about national security and priorities and treating ALL people living here equally.
We ALL must be identifiable, and accounted for. Whoever we are.

And pretending there isn't a more sinister and serious element that exploits non enforcement and lack of assimilation is stupid and dangerous.
Pretending we have a bottomless wealth of resources and space to commit to millions of people is too.

And, I've been abused, called racist and bigoted for expecting people to take responsibility for being here in America. Peace officers are not doormen, it IS their job, because they are on the street and daily interact most closely with their communities, are the first line in identifying who is a problematic element and who isn't.

The federal agencies do not have that access, but are the next level up for dealing with whoever the patrol officers do.

We ALL are required to proved our identity. Especially for driving a car, making purchases, traveling by rail or plane...and accessing social services and if we witnesses to or are victims of a crime.
To say that any particular group is exempt from that, raging against the law agencies or simple public accommodations that require it, is putting a chill on the responsibilities these agencies have with organizing immigration at all.

Most of all, you make fools of us who DO care about the ethics of rewarding those who do the right thing, and asserting accountability against those who don't.
It isn't right, that someone impatient with our laws, is treated the same as someone who WAS.

If you shove people in line ahead of you, and decide that you deserve to be in front because you think your issue is more urgent, then you're wrong.
You don't rob banks, you don't use someone else's ss number and you don't get to maintain a lifetime of non assimilation because you expect the country you adopted to accommodate you and your primary language, not the other way around.
We need to have unity here in America, people who respect the laws that apply to everyone.

If they don't because someone is gay, they don't because they are gay EVERYWHERE. Whether someone is gay here or Brazil, how does that justify cheating a legal immigrant?

I think these boycotts, and hysteria over this being a racist approach to illegal immigrants is bullshit.
There isn't anything racist about not being able to drive a car because you don't have a driver's license.
NOBODY can drive a car without one.
There isn't anything racist about not being able to prove who you are, everyone who is legally processed the way they are supposed to be, has something to prove who they are, and their right to be here as a foreign born person.

Different needs, different status, ALWAYS requires identification that shows it.
Whether you need glasses, have a medical condition, having the documents that support it, is how we do things. It's how things MUST be done.

It would be unfair to reward anyone who hasn't proven they can discipline themselves through the process of immigration.
I belong to several labor unions. And in the workplace, us card carriers are given just a very few priority privileges over those without the card. There really is very little discernible difference in treatment.
However, non union people on the job site, tend to be overly sensitive about that status. And one woman complained and bitched to me about it over several days.

I finally got fed up with her and told her, if she didn't like it, she had another option instead of complaining: SHE COULD PAY DUES.

And those who don't want to, shouldn't be treated the same as those who do.
Otherwise, you're supporting a whole other level of injustice and unfairness you shouldn't be.

SB1070 hasn't even taken affect. Haven't even had the option of waiting to see just how racist or whatever it's implementation really will be. Yet, so many are so certain it's going to abuse someone.
I hear frauds and cheats cry about how unfair the laws are after they are caught (or will be), instead of THEM giving a crap about who THEY harmed in the process of what they committed.


I'm not buying all this hysteria about racism and the harm SB1070 'will do'.
There is tangible, serious and direct negative effect from illegal immigration. That's not perception, but reality.

Gay folks are seriously going to wreck their cred (which has been hard enough to build) over this one.
You look like you're giving oxygen to a matter of chaos and lack of accountability. The very thing that gay people are accused of accommodating all the time just over marriage.

The subtext of illegal immigration is very different here. And I think, the gay community is miscalculating this and the short sightedness I'm witnessing, will get you burned in the long run.

What part of illegal alien is not clear here?here in Arizona we hope the invasion from our southern border will stop.I support sb 1070 the new law mirrors the federal immigration law,what is racist about that,so please read the new law before trying to put your racist spin on it.the point of the law is, if you are here in Arizona illegally please go home,we simply cant afford to keep paying for welfare,food stamps,child care,and free educations.not to mention the crime wave of murders,kid nap-pings, home invasions,burglary's ,dui arrests, identification theft, auto theft,assaults,drug trafficking,gangs, human smuggling and cop killings. the state of Arizona has a responsibility to protect its citizens and from this ongoing 20 year crime wave,the Federal government obviously doesn't care.so Arizona has been forced to pass laws to protect its citizens from this foreign invasion. so I am sure the majority of legal Arizona citizens would have no problem deporting illegal aliens to California, gay or otherwise.

What part of illegal alien is not clear here?here in Arizona we hope the invasion from our southern border will stop.I support sb 1070 the new law mirrors the federal immigration law.what is racist about that?so please read the new law before trying to put your racist spin on it.the point of the law is, if you are here in Arizona illegally please go home,we simply cant afford to keep paying for your welfare,food stamps,child care,and free educations.not to mention the crime wave of murders,kid napping, home invasions,burglary's ,dui arrests, identification theft, auto theft,assaults,drug trafficking,gang crime, human smuggling and cop killings. the state of Arizona has a responsibility to protect its citizens and from this ongoing 20 year crime wave.the Federal government obviously doesn't care.so Arizona has been forced to pass laws to protect its citizens from this foreign invasion. so I am sure the majority of legal Arizona citizens would have no problem deporting illegal aliens to California, gay or otherwise.

The Tea Bag Party are just “haters not debaters” or as others have dubbed them “screamers not dreamers”, with their failed attempts at stopping Healthcare reform, they say they respect the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence but they do not mind passing laws, through weak Governors (no one voted for this crazy) who only cares about getting elected Governor, on the backs of undocumented workers, that will not pass Constitution muster.

Brewer signed into law;

1. S.B. 1070,
2. No permit conceal weapons law,
3. The famous Birthers law,
4. Banning Ethic studies law,

5. Could she be behind the Mural in Prescott, Arizona, ordered to be whiten,
6. On deck to pass, no citizenship to babies born to undocumented workers,

7. If she can read she should look up Arizona’s House Bill 2779 from two years ago (which was un-constitution and failed when legally challenged),
8. The boycotted Martin Luther King Day, what idiots don’t want another holiday? Yes, you guessed it Arizona.

Well Arizona, you can boycott new holidays and keep passing crazy laws and the rest of us will continue to challenged them in a court of law and continue to add cities to our Boycott of your state.

I real cannot believe anything that comes out of Brewer’s mouth, in an interview she first said her father had died in Germany fighting the Nazi in World War II (war ended 1945) but of course we find out the truth that father was never in Germany and died in California in 1955. But we are suppose to believe everything else she says, right!

As for the Tea Bag Party, their phony patriotism is sickening; they are just racists going by another name. We all know you are just itching to put a sheet on their head? Let’s face it the Republicans had eight years to deal with health care, immigration, energy (remember Cheney’s secret meetings with oil companies where loosening regulation and oversight were sealed), climate change and financial oversight and governance and they failed. It appears that the Republican Party is only good at starting wars (two in eight years, with fat contracts to friends of Cheney/Bush) but not at winning wars as seen by the continuing line of body bags that keep coming home. The Republicans party will continue turned inward to their old fashion obstructionist party (and their Confederacy appreciation roots) because they continue to allow a small portions (but very loud portion) of their party of “birthers, baggers and blowhards” to rule their party. I will admit that this fringe is very good at playing “Follow the Leader” by listening to their dullard leaders, Beck, Hedgecock, Hannity, O’Reilly, Rush, Savage, Sarah Bailin, Orly Taitz, Victoria Jackson, Michele Bachmann and the rest of the Blowhards and acting as ill programmed robots (they have already acted against doctors that perform abortions).

The Birthers and the Tea Bag party crowd think they can scare, intimidate and force others to go along with them by comments like “This time we came unarmed”, let me tell you something not all ex-military join the fringe militia crazies who don’t pay taxes and run around with face paint in the parks playing commando, the majority are mature and understand that the world is more complicated and grey than the black and white that these simpleton make it out to be and that my friend is the point. The world is complicated and people like Hamilton, Lincoln, and Roosevelt believed that we should use government a little to increase social mobility, now it’s about dancing around the claim of government is the problem. The sainted Reagan passed the biggest tax increase in American history and as a result federal employment increased, but facts are lost when mired in mysticism and superstition. For a party that gave us Abraham Lincoln, it is tragic that the ranks are filled with too many empty suits and the crazy Birthers who have not learned that the way our courts work is that you get a competent lawyer, verifiable facts and present them to a judge, if the facts are real and not half baked internet lies, then, and only then, do you proceed to trial. The Birthers seem to be having a problem with their so called “Internet facts”. Let’s face it no one will take the Birthers seriously until they win a case, but until then, you will continue to appear dumb, crazy or racist, or maybe all three. I heard that Orly Taitz now wants to investigate the “Republican 2009 Summer of Love” list: Assemblyman, Michael D. Duvall (CA), Senator John Ensign (NV), Senator Paul Stanley (TN), Governor Mark Stanford (SC), Board of Ed Chair, and Kristin Maguire AKA Bridget Keeney (SC), she wants to re-establish a family values party, that is like saying that the Catholic Church cares about the welling being of children in their care, too late for that. Yee Haw!