Saturday, May 11, 2013

Meet The East Bay's Newest Progressive Patron Saint

ILLUSTRATION/Steven Tavares PHOTO/Matt Santos
SUNDAY COLUMN | Linda Lye, the whip-smart attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union was ecstatic. Walking out the Alameda County Administration Building last Valentine’s Day, Lye had just tweeted her followers, “I heart Richard Valle.” No, she didn’t love Valle for his thick, perpetually well-trimmed white mustache, Lye, like a growing number of county residents are starting to realize what many in south county already know, Richard Valle is the East Bay’s new progressive patron saint.

Valle speaking to voters last November
in Union City. PHOTO/Matt Santos
In the past three months, Valle, who was election to the seat he was appointed last year after the resignation of Nadia Lockyer, has been at the forefront of the two of the most contentious issues in the local progressive community, both emanating from the office of Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern.

One involves drones hovering over the East Bay and, the other, undocumented immigrants being held in county jails for extended periods of time. In both case, Valle has been easily most vocal progressive voice on the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and possibly the only politician in the region willing to stand up to the stubborn and increasingly authoritarian Ahern.

During a county public protection committee meeting last February Ahern detailed his desire to purchase drones for Alameda County. Valle, though, was not buying it and expressed great doubt whether privacy afforded to residents will be protected by the use of drones spying in the East Bay skies. Of course, comments like these is what facilitated Lye’s amorous tweet afterwards.

However, what makes Valle wholly unique in these parts is both his opposition and support seems based on his own moral beliefs system and devoid of scoring political points or corny grandstanding. Even when the bullying Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty attempted to coax him into a public fight last month, you could also most witness Valle entering into his own personal Zen. There’s a reason for that. Valle is a practicing Buddhist and often speaks of his leadership in terms of harmony with the universe. During his campaign last year against former Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi, he seemingly told a group of voters he had never killed a fly. "You can’t take a life unless you can replace it," he said.

Last month, following a spate of incidents in the Hayward area involving undocumented residents being detained by the sheriff and held for extending periods of time under the federal Secure Communities program, Valle singlehandedly drew up a resolution asking the sheriff to relent. In one memorable sequence, Valle asks for respect towards the area's undocumented residents.

“They have families. They have families in our schools. They work in our hotel and our restaurants. They work as care-givers,” said Valle. “Some of them are my neighbors and friends and a lot of them have fear of Secure Communities because they don’t want to get swooped up in that net.”

The dazzling scene of a politician standing up for the needy appeared to have caught the cynical Haggerty off guard and he unloaded on Valle for rocking the boat and cracking the board’s façade of comity. Supervisor Wilma Chan, another solid liberal, agreed with Valle and the resolution passed even as Haggerty condescendingly called it just a worthless piece of paper. “The sheriff can do whatever he wants,” Haggerty said, and that is exactly what worries Valle and many others in the county.

The only other politician south of Oakland who consistently stood for the progressive values of helping the poor, children and minorities as he fought off the right was Pete Stark. He’s gone now, but a vacuum was created. In just a short time, though, a new warrior for the left has taken his seat on the left hand side of Rep. Barbara Lee.

“If you don’t take it down, I’m going to burn it down.”
-Scott Haggerty, Alameda County supervisor, May 9, during a public protection hearing in regards to the Golden State Warriors flag flying over San Francisco City Hall. Although, Haggerty made the statement in jest to San Francisco Supervisor Eric Mar, no doubt he meant it.

"We can’t keep changing quarterbacks, coaches every other week or year or every two years. We’re gonna be just like the Oakland Raiders, in last place.”
-Noel Gallo, Oakland council member, May 10, telling NBC Bay Area, the recent spate of changes at the command of the Oakland Police Department is creating instability in the city.

The Week That Was
>>>2 OPD chiefs resign: What a wild week in Oakland. In just two days starting last Wednesday, a succession of three police chiefs came and went. Howard Jordan resignation followed the demotion of Anthony Toribio and Mayor Jean Quan named Sean Whent interim chief on Friday. There is a growing belief the major shakeup at OPD was facilitated by the new compliance director Thomas Frazier, who was in town this week following a scathing report on Jordan’s handling of Occupy Oakland in 2011. Frazier also slammed the department’s inability to investigation police misconduct.

>>>America’s Cup crewman dies in the bay: Two-time Olympic medalist Andrew Simpson, a crewman for Sweden’s America’s Cup entrant, Artemis Racing, which is based in Alameda, died while the team was testing a new 72-foot catamaran in the bay. The speedy, some say dangerous iteration of the America’s Cup boat, was just delivered to the team’s headquarters in Alameda earlier this week. Reports say the boat may have broken up in the water and trapping the 35-year-old Simpson underwater.

>>>Pot dispensaries can be zoned by cities: The California State Supreme Court found local municipalities have the right to create zoning restrictions for medical cannabis dispensaries within their cities limits. For some East Bay cities, like Hayward, for instance, the ruling will likely reaffirm what it has already been doing as an opponent of dispensaries. However, neighboring San Leandro is in a gray area. Although it had once followed Hayward’s lead on the issue, its mayor and some council members have begun to lead the city in the opposite direction. The ruling, this week, will certainly embolden the opposition in San Leandro and make this a likely hot-button political issue next election season.

>>>Haggerty sued: Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty was sued in Alameda County Superior Court by his former chief of staff. In the suit, Chris Gray, asks for $110,000 in annual salary and reinstatement of his job. In addition, Gray, who was Haggerty’s right hand man for 16 years, unleashed a barrage of very serious allegations against his former boss, including kickbacks, shady lands deals with county assets, forcing his staff to work on his re-election campaign on the taxpayers’ dime and an accusation Haggerty asked Alameda County sheriffs to cover up evidence that he was arrested across the bay.

>>>AB 180 to Assembly floor: Oakland Assemblyman Rob Bonta’s bill that could one day allow Oakland the right to ban handguns passed committee this week. AB 180 would create an exception from state law allowing Oakland to enact its own gun laws. Gun advocates say, if one jurisdiction is allowed the consideration, more will follow and infringe on the rights of lawful gun users. The bill may not have legs, but many are getting the feeling Bonta is using the high-profile gun control issue, among many issues, to burnish a run for much bigger position in the state’s Democratic hierarchy.

>>>Fruitvale Station trailer debuts: Fruitvale Station, the highly-acclaimed film about the final day of Oscar Grant, the Hayward man who was killed by a BART police officer on New Year’s morning 2008, is coming to theaters later this summer. In the meantime, a trailer for the film starring Michael B. Jordan and Oscar winner Octavia Spencer, debuted this week. Watch it here.

Tweet of the Week
“Anybody else notice the name of the new Acting Deputy Chief in charge of Internal Affairs is Outlaw? #oakland #excitingcity”
-@dto510, tweeting May 10, following the major shakeup of leadership at the Oakland Police Department this week.

Best Reads
>>>Glenn Greenwald writes a belated love letter to Rep. Barbara Lee over her Sept. 14, 2001 speech against the authorization of military force that led to the Iraq War. (The Guardian, May 7). 

>>>If the state Republican Party is to ever have a chance, it’s going to come from the ideas of Ruben Barrales and GROW Elect. Here may be the Democrat’s weak spot: ”There are signs of tension among California’s Democrats: between the wealthy whites, who largely represent coastal areas, and poorer, inland Latinos. Latino lawmakers have backed several recent regulatory and education-reform measures, often setting them against members of their own party or their union backers.” (The Economist, May 4).

>>>Exhibit A for why the Bay Area’s corporate media does not have your back: How did they miss the most important part of the scathing Frazier reports against the Oakland Police Department’s top brass? Ali Winston details how some of the most notorious police misconduct cases could be soon revisited. (East Bay Express, May 8).

Voice of the People
“Hey Gray, how long have you known that this was going on with Haggerty before your conscience kicked in?.."
-Anonymous, commenting May 10 about Scott Haggerty's former chief of staff, Chris Gray, suing him this week and alleging corruption on "Fired Chief Of Staff Accuses Alameda County Supervisor Of Major Corruption."


Dick Valley's full of shit. He doesn't give a tinker's damn about the rule of law and simply wants open borders. His German father would have something different to say to that, I'm sure. He lost to Gail Steele years ago. It took the Lockyer machine to get him appointed and then shitloads of Bill's ill-gotten $$ to get him elected. Guy's a ho for sure.

Yes Chris Gray is the Saint Patron of conscience. Amen.

The people of his District love Richard Valle and that's why we voted for him. I'm sure you voted for someone else, didn't win, and now you are whining and crying like the adult child you are. Boo Hoo!

The above is definitely written by one Valley's stooges who no doubt also voted for Nadia the skank. Ho ho!

The question for Valle is the following.

After the passage of the much demanded comprehensive immigration reform, will Supervisor Valle be in favor of enforceing the provisions in the bill?

Will he encourage the sheriff to co-opporate with the federal government in the detainment, and deportation of newly arriving undocumented immigrants and workers?

If not then why have any new law. Of what use is the long demanded comprehensive immigration reform if leaders like Valle will only support non-enforcment of that law?

I don't know his stance, but it concerns me.
Perhaps he should let us know what provisions of the new law we should obey and which provisions we should ignore.
Then if he picks and chooses among those, can we also pick and choose which laws we should obey in Alameda Co. when it comes to all the other issues.

I'm curious about his opinion.

Valle looks like a turtle from a cartoon in this picture.

9:27 is spot on. I'll vote for him or her for supervisor!

Richard Valle was Democratically elected by people like my wife and my neighbor who love both of the Valle's. Even though I voted for someone else I do respect the process unlike you. Grow up, and if you don't like what he does vote for someone else next time. I somewhat agree with 8:35.

Our family voted for Richard Valle because he is progressive and so are we. BTW so is most of the District. If you don't like it--MOVE

Oh geez a Mexican Buddhist? bahahahahhahahah What a joke. This aging Cholo needs to get the hydraulics on his Impala fixed, along with his head.

Question for Valle.

Does his Buddhist/Progressive philosophy have any space in it to have any future illegal worker fired, detained and deported.

Or would he always say, they have the right, like any other human, to be here.

That is the true opinion of many of those clamoring for the current immigration reform.
The practical application of essentially open borders is not a issue they wish to address.
They deal with a perfect world where immigration would be self limiting by enlightened people.

Where you wouldn't have 29 million Indians, Indonesians, Nigerians, Egyptians, and others coming to the USA within 10 years of a essentially open immigration system.

At some point you have to agree on a law and then abide by it, even if it causes problems for some families. Perhaps a 40 year old brother can't join his 45 year old sister in America just because they are related. No system will be perfect, but we'd expect a public official like Valle to realize we do need enforcement of some rules, just as we do in traffic stops and lights.

At times, good intentions lead to bad outcomes for the entire society.

Talk to carpenters in Alameda County.
If they aren't working on publically funded projects, then they are making about half the real wages they made in 1975 (inflation adjusted) and they aren't getting any benefits.

That because the entire private construction market has shifted to sub-contractors using undocumented labor.

So real people, residents of Alameda County, working men, have had their economic environment substantially ruined because so many progressive folks have welcomed undocumented labor with open arms.

Funny though, cities like Oakland continue to make their own hires PROVE they are legally entitled to work.

I guess its all about the public employee unions protecting their own turf.

What say yee Supervisor Valle.

In the future will you support enforcement of the new immigration reform laws? Or if not, what is your idea of how to handle the laws once passed by congress?

I would also ask the same of him. Great narrative.

And yet he was elected because we voted for him. What a bunch of sore losers!

Paul Var GAS - if you don't like him -run against him. We'll beat you like a drum just like San Leandro did every time you ran.

Lesson from the knuckleheads here, is to not ask any questions of office holders, because if you do, that means you're against them.
Instead just assume everything and every view they have will be perfect.
If you disagree with anything they say or propose, then you are against them 100% and are sour grapes, even if you voted for them.

Knucklehead, a nice description of pea brain political types.

Knuckleheads is a good name for the extreme bloggers who can't stand progressives and the fact that most people in Valle's district agree with his views. Move to a Southern work for less state if you don't like our Bay Area viewpoints. We are progressive and proud of it. Valle represents us--Get it.
That's why he got elected and your candidate didn't. He's doing what we elected him to do!

Laughable response. Exactly what I was pointing out.

Any question about anything and you are suddenly branded as a "extreme blogger who can't stand progressives"....Then told to "move to a Southern work for less state"

As though "we progressives" or those who self describe, hold all the views that any mainstream Democrat would hold. If not in total agreement, MOVE OUT.

"Thats why he got elected and YOUR candidate didn't"

Oh I see, and who was I supporting?

Then I suppose you probably say the same thing about anyone who may not have voted for Pete Stark, and anyone who may not vote for Mike Honda.

One party, one mind, one set of views....Thats ALL WE NEED here in Alameda County.
Every single Democrat on the same page on every single issue.
If not MOVE OUT, to the South or perhaps Idaho!
Change parties...WE don't need any moderate Democratic views in Alameda County, only "progressive ones".

Obey the group-think or MOVE.

OMG--Your views aren't moderate--LMAO

9:14 If you're a Dem. you are an ultra conservative tea party Dem. You blog on the citizen all the time and you are to the right of Hitler.

Not even likely. But while we're setting the record straight, 10:27, you're to the left of the Politburo [look it up].

Dick Valley doesn't respect the rule of law unless he agrees with it. No dice. You can huff, puff, and bluff, but there is no way on this earth that we're doing open borders. Not happening in anyone's lifetime.

LAYFA--Laughing AT your fat ass!

Aqui! Aqui!

10:41-Richard Valle would not be elected if he agreed with your ultra extreme views. Thank god he doesn't and that's why we voted for and elected him. What a poor loser you are--don't you believe in democracy? Richard is doing exactly what the majority of us want him to do Quit your crying. You are the child who when they didn't get what they wanted, took their ball and went home. LOL

Aqui! Aqui! --Paul Var GAS--bahahahahahahahah

Our family voted for Richard Valle and we have agreed with, and supported his positions so far. We definitely will vote for him again. I wonder if those conservative bloggers, who call themselves moderates, even voted for him. If not, who did they vote for? I'm not sure they even live in this District, because this District is very progressive.

There have been many times throughout history when the 'majority' have been wrong. This time is no different.

Dick Valley needs to go.

Such bravado. He needs to go to the priesthood.

Despite all the shouting, the question at hand, was the following.

"AFTER" --- AFTER the passage of the much approved (even by most Democrats) comprehensive immigration reform, there will be at least two issues that come to mind.

#1. Anyone who arrived after January 1st, 2012, and does not have permission to still be here, will still be considered undocumented and not legally entitled to live or work in the country.
That is what the Senate Gang of Eight bill says.

#2. Anyone who comes over the border without documents after passage of this comprehensive immigration reform will also be outside the scope of the bill and if here will be undocumented and unauthorized to work.

So the issue regarding those two above points is as follows.
When, after passage and signing, the sheriff once again arrests, holds, or detains a unauthorized immigrant and then hands them over to ICE, what will the stance of Richard Valle be on whether the sheriff should comply with the newly passed comprehensive immigration reform, even though it may not be exactly what the Supervisor wished it was.

Additionally, will he support, as outlined in the new comprehensive immigration reform bill, the mandate for use of E-Verify to ensure that no unauthorized immigrants can work.

Or will he choose to only enforce and cooperate with those portions of the immigration reform that he agrees with?

Remember, we are talking about the measures contained in the comprehensive immigration reform bill that is supported and urged on by Senator Chuck Schumer D-NY, Dick Durban D-IL Senator Barbara Boxer D-CA, Senator Feinstein D-CA, and I'm sure supported by entire Bay Area Democratic congressional delegation.

That is the measure that I am asking as to whether Richard Valle will support the implementation and cooperation with and for.
And support the sheriffs cooperation in the future.

Now, if you wish to declare all those supporters of that bill as right wing extremists, who are NOT in tune with Alameda County Progressives, then I guess it gives the readers a good idea of what your definitions are about progressive, and right wing extremists.
Who is Holy and who is Evil in your book.

Richard Valle is better than most elected officials and I trust him to be honest.

Valle got elected because most of us agree with him. Who is evil and who is holy in your book? Who did you vote for? Are you in his District? Why don't you answer some questions? We love Richard but it's plain to see you don't. In every election there are winners and losers--your side lost--get over it.

Why can't Dick Valley man-up and do what's right?

He's trolling for the illegals and doesn't respect the laws of this country. Pretty sure his German dad wouldn't agree with his subversion. By the way, Dick's last name was spelled 'Valley' until he felt the need to score points with the Hispanic community.

Nothing but a Lockyer stooge.

12:04, Nice to see you dodge the basic questions raised in the 11:42 post.
Since you can't label all those senators and congressmembers as right-wing loons, you instead completely avoid the reality of the proposed immigration reform bill they support.

I think the readers can see right through your bluster and unwillingness to speak to the issue raised.

Nice to see you dodge the questions in the 12:04 post--MAN UP

School yard games. Readers can see that.
Your unwillingness to speak to the issue raised.
Not about who did or didn't support whom in 2012.
On that count, you'd be most surprised.

But I wrote about issue questions.

You should ignore them 12:04. One is Paul Vargas who lost every election he ran in and is a right wing extremist, and the other is a non-union contractor who doesn't live in the District and is trying to tell us how to vote. I voted for Richard Valle too along with most of my neighborhood--Thats why he was elected. Don't even waste your time with these characters --They lost and are now whining.

What would be most funny is if this guy Paul Vargas never reads this board.
All the time devoted to him

Oh yeah, on the other point, you got it, I'm a non-union contractor. Thats the ticket.

But don't let my neighbor in back know, or he'll be wondering why I've postponed fixing our mutual fence for the last 4 years.
That plus your ideas on who I supported in the Supervisor race.
Lets see, who were the other choices, I must have supported one of them..

Mark Green, Mark Turnquist, and Mary Hayashi.

OK, tell me, who did I support, since you obviously are 100% certain I didn't support Valle.

Or else I'd NEVER question or wonder about any of his current stances. You know, a good follower never questions anything their candidate does or says after the election.

Makes me wonder why all those folks are objecting to Obama on so many issues, such as medical marijuana. Right wingers I guess.


I agree with the ZZZ's above. Let's see if I have this right. Valle was the most progressive of all the candidates in the race. He won by a large margin because people agreed with most of his views which were progressive. Now some bloggers are criticizing him because of his progressiveness. He's doing what the people who elected him, want him to do. What kind of politician is he? Gee--one with integrity. Find someone else to criticize and move on with your lives. These same people repeating the same worn out tedious statements are boring.

As I see it, there seems to be one person above complaining about Valle's position.

Reviewing the rest of the posts, I see only questions being asked about Valle's position vis a vis the newly proposed immigration reform bill.

Questions which others for unknown reasons seem to interpret as opposition to everything Valle stands for or favors.

Perhaps someone could re-read those posts and explain where they do anything other than question what Valle's response or position might be after passage of the proposed bill. (excluding those posts by that are obviously and clearly anti-Valle.)
Some of you are so sensitive that anyone might question Valle's position regarding the future.
So much so you strike out in anger at even the thought that someone would question any position he may take.

You know, this rather extreme stance you exhibit is very reminiscent of the last election when there was an attempt to brand anyone who didn't support Pete Stark as being some kind of Tea Party member.

Funny to remember that when we see Nancy Pelosi hosting a fund raiser for Swalwell. I guess you'll be saying the same thing about anyone who supports Ro Khanna.

But split up Democrats into two groups and say nasty things about anyone who fails to agree with you on every issue.
Then go even further and imagine things in posts that aren't even there if you read it carefully. Then tie all posts you deem such into one single bag, all evil.

Very effective on convincing all those who already fully agree with you. No need to entertain or reply to policy questions that might possibly not bow down to your "one and only" position that is acceptable.

A great way to bring in new people to your position.
A sign of great security in your gospel of correctness.


To the child above, son, it's way past your bedtime.

You need to go to sleep early and let the adults take care of business here. This is a forum for grown-ups, not little kids like you who need to learn your lessons so that you know what you're talking about when you grow up!

Thanks for your many posts, not one of which ever even approached answering the questions raised.

Deep thinking guys... keep it up.
You've got all the answers, no use in discussing anything. Way to go. Don't even consider any new ideas that might come along to improve things.
No, we've decided the correct position and that is that!

Your ideas have been rejected many times on this blog and they are NOT new!

Five Reasons Immigration Reform Matters

1. Lives are at stake. Every day, the government deports more than 1,100 aspiring Americans—mothers, breadwinners, students—ripping families apart simply for trying to build a better life.2 Our broken immigration system keeps abused immigrants from seeking help, immigrant witnesses from testifying against criminals, and too many working in unsafe and illegal conditions. In a moral America, this must stop.

2. The economy will benefit. Legal status for 11 million would add $1.5 trillion to the U.S. economy via new tax revenue from the increased wages that workers with legal status earn. And Social Security would become more solvent, thanks to the $611 billion that immigrants would add to the system over the next 75 years.3

3. The right is going all out to kill it. Last time immigration reform seemed inevitable—in 2006 and 2007—a vocal conservative minority killed it. Roy Beck, director of the fearmongering nativist group NumbersUSA, has said that conservatives have sent more than 1 million faxes to Congress already this year, and more than 190,000 people have signed his group's petition against reform.4 If Roy Beck and friends are mobilizing to stop immigration reform, you can bet that's a sign that there's something progressive here that's worth fighting for.

4. We have the numbers to get real, meaningful, comprehensive immigration reform now. The 2012 election was a watershed victory for Latino, Asian-American, and progressive voters—thanks in part to MoveOn members' work—and we can't let anyone forget that. 71% of Latino voters and 73% of Asian-American voters cast their ballots for President Obama.5 The rising American electorate that helped elect President Obama is more diverse than ever and demanding real immigration reform—and voters are going to hold all politicians accountable for delivering on their promises.
5. We're here because a social movement has brought us here. From Arizona day laborers who stood up to armed vigilantes to immigrant young people known as DREAMers who risked arrest wearing their graduation caps and gowns—brave women, men, and children have risked everything to make this moment possible.6 They're asking us to stand with them, and it's time we answered their call.

Please share this with your friends and family—and talk about it at the dinner table tonight.

1. "Washington is deeply engaged with immigration. The public? Not so much." The Washington Post, May 1, 2013

2. "Opinion: Removing Non-Criminals from the Deportation Backlog Makes Us Safer," Fox News Latino, August 19, 2011

3. "Immigrants Are Makers, Not Takers," Center for American Progress, February 8, 2013

4. "Foes of immigration 'amnesty' mobilizing," USA Today, March 7, 2013

5. "The Facts on Immigration Today," Center for American Progress, April 3, 2013

6. "How to Close the Distance Between Washington and the Reality of Immigration," Huffington Post, May 2, 2013

Great post. Now there is a Senate Immigration Reform package on the table now.

If it passes, will you support the provisions contained within it.

--To include the use of E-Verify to prevent unauthorized individuals from working in the future in all areas of employment.

--To exclude from working and legal residence, any individual who arrived after January 1st, 2012 and who is undocumented.

There are other provisions, but since since you favor that immigration reform package, will you favor those two above mentioned provisions?

Or should the bill be defeated because you don't support those two provisions?

Finally, if that senate bill is passed, should local elected officials support the enforcement of such legislation?


You want to not 'rip families apart?' Send them all back to the home country! Don't give me this crap about ripping apart. We have a department of immigrations, and we damn well will use it.

Hey, that's the American way!

I support the Senate Bill on the table now without any changes. Do you?

We have a department of DEPORTATION, and we damn well will use it! Don't want to put all those good men and women out of work.

I was referring to the intelligent posts of 12:38 and 1:48 not the idiotic racist at 2:09.

To the blogger at 2:09 and 2:11 --you are adding nothing meaningful to the blog--why do you bother?

He's probably the Paul Vargas that keeps getting mentioned. What a loser.

The truth is a harsh mistress, whether you like it or not!

12:38 is an apologist. This melo-drama doesn't play in America. We are of nation of laws. Apparently it has become my job defacto to remind you all of this.

Not to worry. I'm not easily or otherwise discouraged.

The last time I checked, the heading of this article was 'Meet The East Bay's Newest Progressive Patron Saint.' Can we please just get back to the discussion of pointing out all the flaws that are Dick Valley?

Immigration will be debated in the senate, killed in the house, and cause Obama a moment of brooding. Then perhaps finally get back to the status quo, the shadows until the ill-conceived amnesty is placed on the trash heap of history where it belongs and ultimately will be dumped.


All the responses in this article use the term Progressive in the context of politics and political views. I have asked this question before and have yet to get an answere. I will ask it again. Please define what you refer as a political Progressive in your responses. Does Progressive translate in to I expect government to take care of me. And, what does a Conservative believe in? I used to know what being a Democrat meant. I'm not so sure now. I used to believe that Republicans hated and ignored the poor and working class. Is this still the case. My point is it would help me understand your position if you described clearly what you believe in instead of describing yourself as a conservative or progressive or a democrat or a republican. Thanks.

I am a true progressive. Registered Democrat--since age 18--support abortion, death penalty and euthanasia. [Must support all three to be consistent, otherwise picking and choosing]. Support protection of the environment and planet above all else. ALL else. Finally, definitely oppose amnesty for all illegals. The American way is one in which you take your turn at the back of the line without cutting in front of others. These are TRUE progressive positions, however, I have no doubt that the Berkeleyites who have hijacked much of the Democratic party the way that the evangelicals did so to the Republican party will disagree. Too bad for them

Hope this helps to answer your question, mack.

A conservative is somebody who embraces the past and opposes or is resistant to change.

A progressive is somebody who wants to move forward by successive steps for reform.

No, I am the true progressive. Registered Dem for over 40 years. Support abortion, euthanasia for those who want to end their life instead of suffer pain, and amnesty as put forth in the Senate compromise. I oppose the death penalty because of cost to taxpayers and the fact that innocent people have been put to death. These are true progressive positions and I'm not from Berkeley.

Paul Vargas is a 40 year old virgin who lives with his parents. Ask him about it!

Will the REAL progressive please stand up? Not 12:40--das fo sure! Oh, das for sure!

12:40 is more of a progressive than 4:47 and das for sure! I consider myself progressive and my positions are closer to 12:40 than 4:47. Oh, das fo sure.

How bout the real conservatives reveal their positions? Dare you? LOL

Unfortunately, 12:14 is very mixed up about 12:40--but hey, that's o.k. And dat's fo definitely sure!

Glad to see that some of my lexicon has rubbed off. There might be hope yet.

Muy muchisimo excellente!

Aqui! Aqui! Ahora mismo!!

People better stop with the Spanish or the racist tea party conservative extremes, who are mostly white males according to the data, will condemn the progressive patron saints of the compromise amnesty plan even more, and dats fo sure. According to the polls most of us agree with amnesty except for the extreme right. But what the he**, we must all be wrong! I didn't see anyone answer 12:14's question.

Guess the kid up above is wrong. Wouldn't be the first time in history when a 'majority' have been wrong. Germany during the 1930s, for example.

When we don't follow our laws that apply equally to all and look the other way that's when we throw in the towel. I don't hail from that way of thinking. Open borders ain't uh happening, but you can continue to live in a dream world. Oh dat's for sure!

Anon 8:51 lives in a dream world if he doesn't believe the times are changing. Most people enter this country through work visas, student visas and travel for vacation. Then some stay. You can spend billions trying to close the borders and it will have miniscule effect. Closed borders ain't uh happening. Oh dat's for sure! I suggest you read anon May 14th 12:38 p.m.

Anon above--well said. May 14th 12:38 was a fantastic post. It changed my mind to yes on amnesty--thanks

Borders ARE closed, though with many holes in them. I definitely agree that times are changing. Public opinion polls place amnesty success in the House at no better than 50-1. Any takers?

For you kids who don't understand the legislative process it doesn't matter what the senate passes; it is DOA in the House. Without reconciliation there is nothing for Obama to sign=status quo until we can get it right. No way we're doing 1986 all over again. America just won't tolerate it--the electeds I mean. They're who count and determine.

I must say that it does my lil' ol' heart good to read: "Dat's fo sure! Dat's for sure!" Best imitation of a Japanese karate instructor ever from the 'Flintstones.' Those were the days!

If amnesty doesn't go through, the Republicons will never win another presidential election. So, it's a win-win situation for the Dems. Every public opinion poll shows the compromise amnesty plan has huge favorable ratings. This crosses all age groups and all political parties. Even the republicon party has a majority in favor of the plan. So, if the house Republicons vote against amnesty they will destroy their party. Bahahahahahah

Since I'm a Democrat who doesn't support amnesty, works for me! Although I do believe you're being way too generous. Political party switching is inevitable at some point--just because.

You are definitely in a very small minority and entitled to your opinion even though most Americans think you are wrong. As I write this I got word from Washington that the Republicans in the house were working on a compromise amnesty plan that would be acceptable to the Democrats. That's the point-THEY
believe they have to come up with something to survive as a party.

Posturing galore. When it comes down to the votes--actual votes--there aren't enough House Republicans who will vote for it, assuming it becomes a reconciliation bill.

Ronald Reagan, the closet hero of Obama, did amnesty 27 years ago. I suppose your 'solution' is an amnesty every 30 years, give or take. America doesn't believe in rewarding those who break the law. If it did then you might as well tear down what passes for borders now. Amnesty was no solution in 1986, and it's no solution in 2013. Either party coming up with amnesty is offering no solution at all.

It's going to happen, and if you don't believe that you live in La La Land. BTW most people disagree with your position, and you know it! Your white male racism is showing but I doubt you'll admit to that. OMG

Not going to happen because the votes aren't there.

Most people in Germany voted for Hitler, who was democratically elected.

My advice to you, son/daughter, let the adults continue with the conversation. You wouldn't know a racist if he or she stood up and shook your hand. Past your bedtime.

Hitler was a racist just like you. Thank god the voters across this nation are in favor of amnesty!

8:11 you seem to be incapable of adult thought. You are trying to compare apples to oranges. LMAO at your illogical thinking. Are you Paul Vargas that people are laughing at?

You can huff and puff, but at the end of the day you're nothing but a bluff.

You want to pick and choose the laws that you agree with, but we don't do that here in America.

Even though it's light outside and afternoon, still way past your bedtime. The House will vote down amnesty and then I will definitely be the one to proudly say "I sure told you so!" You need to look up the definition of racism. You have no grasp of what it means. But that's o.k. as you are an uneducated neanderthal.

Again, let the adults deal with this issue. Just too complicated for a simpleton like you.

America is a nation of laws and will so remain, whether you like it or not! Back to Berkeley with you.

You must be Paul Vargas--that's why you were never elected. We live in the District and voted for Richard Valle. Can you follow no intelligent thought process or argument? Can you answer no question? Why will the Republican controlled House vote down amnesty when doing so would condemn them to mediocrity and lose the House according to the polls? You can't just wish for something to happen and expect you'll be right. You're the one who's huffing and puffing. If you can believe the leaks the Republicans are working on a compromise amnesty because they will be destroyed by the American voters if they don't. But you are in your own little dream world. LMAO

Kid, you just don't get it. I'll try to dumb it down for you as much as is possible.

There are turncoats in both houses and in both parties. Sure, there are 'compromises' being worked out. One in the senate; one in the house. Eventually they will have to be worked out into one. That's called reconciliation. If a reconciled bill that includes amnesty is put before both the senate and the house, it probably will pass in the senate. In the house there are 435 members, assuming there are no vacancies due to resignation or death. Therefore, since an absolute majority is needed for it to pass--at least 218 votes--that's why it is doomed. There aren't enough Democrats and just a few turncoat Republicans who will support any bill that has amnesty. Just because a FEW Republicans from urban districts will bend, doesn't mean that there are enough overall. There aren't. Add to this equation--and let's cut right to the chase--that the Hispanic community will not vote in droves for any Republicans even if they cave on amnesty. Not going to happen. As a demographic group on the whole, they are overwhelmingly Democratic. [I'm glad of this since I'm a Democrat, just not of your Berkeley stripe.]

If the bill passes the full senate and then comes up short in the house as it surely will, then it is DOA. That means nothing gets sent to Obama since it is dead. Your hoping against hope that enough GOP members of the entire house--not the 'compromise' committee--will vote in favor. That's when you'll be crying into your bowl of gruel.

This is American politics and rule of law. You find the former convenient when you think it favors you and disdain the latter when you don't agree with it. This is why you just don't get it and will surely be very disappointed in the next few months.

Who the hell is Paul Vargas?

Anon 4:43--you are about as dumb as dumb can be. Let me make it simple so you can try and follow . You may have to read and reread a few times to finally get it. I'm sure I'm older than you kid, and I'm not from berkeley. Hate to disappoint you, but a compromise amnesty plan will pass. You can start your crying now. All the business groups, democratic leaders, republican leaders, the huge donors to both parties, and the American people in huge numbers are pushing for a compromise amnesty plan. It's only the tea bag party and white male racists like yourself who are opposed. I have political friends in the Washington DC area who say the house leaders right now are putting together a compromise amnesty plan of their own that will be accepted by a majority of both the Senate and House after the reconciliation process is completed. You can deny amnesty all you want but you can be sure it will happen because politicians don't want to be on the wrong side of the huge majority of the voters who are in favor of amnesty. I hope you can wrap your white male racist childish mind around the necessity of why this will happen. I doubt if you can, but I take solace in the fact you are an insignificant minority.

Son, I tried to dumb it down for you but being the simpleton you are you just can't grasp the concept. VOTES AREN'T THERE! Sort of like abortion, which I and the American public support. GOP as a whole won't go there; same is oh so true with amnesty.

As for your friends? I'm sure the only one you have is the face in the mirror that has no choice but stare back at you. I am glad that you learned a new word due to my tutoring of you--reconciliation. As for your bent on 'white male racist,' what's that about? I suppose being against ALL human beings who flaunt the rule of law and go under, over, through, and around the border is being a racist. No, sonny, it's called being for the law. That may be a foreign concept to you--pun definitely intended--but that's how America works. Also, I wouldn't reference Washington, DC when you don't understand the legislative process, and this you have been demonstrating repeatedly.

Again, you can huff and puff, but you're wackiness is nothing but a bluff. In the absence of your parents, I feel that it is my responsibility to tell you to let your elders do the writing here. You're far too young, inexperienced, and frankly ignorant, to carry on any type of a meaningful narrative. First things first. Get a good night's rest, study, and listen to your parents. Once you get a rudimentary education, then we'll see what you've learned if anything.

As the old expression goes: yours is a terribly wasted mind. Those who are older and wiser than you will make sure the laws of this country are followed.

Last thing for the night, or morning as it might be, while there is shame in being from Berkeley, kid you can't deny who you are. Got it written all over your lame laments.

And you have white male racist written all over your sick and pitiful childish comments. Keep your stupid comments coming because you are sure to persuade people that amnesty is the right thing to do. I'm so happy you are such a small segment of the population according to the polls. Amnesty will happen because it is the right thing to do, and too many groups are working on the compromise that will achieve more than enough votes. You should really do some reading as your lack of education is showing. They do have GED courses for you to consider. You should also consider getting some mental help-LMAO

Anon12:11---I too agree with 9:52 - you are a racist and need mental help!

Amnesty will pass in 2013 and it is the right thing to do.

Go back to the hole you crawled out of.

Pathetic individuals from Berkeley. Not to worry, we'll deport you while we're at it. Your lack of intelligence belongs in a third world country from which your mind hails if not your body.

I'm guessing you came over on the Mariel Boat Lift of 1980. Look it up. Truly pathetic in that your minds have truly been wasted. No amnesty in this country. Rule of law will prevail.

You are a pathetic white male racist in need of mental help--get it quickly. OMG

So proud of my eight year old daughter. They recently were discussing illegal immigration at her private day school in Piedmont. She came home and said "Mommy, teacher explained how we can all do our part to help with the twelve million." "What's that, honey?" "If each one of us would be responsible for just one illegal we see outside, and call ICE, then we could help to enforce the law." I was so proud, that coming from a precocious eight year old. Makes sense, too.

This is a lesson that should be taught in all schools throughout the country and would help to make America strong and proud once again. Just need the courage to say "Amnesty, hell no!" It's so true that we can learn from the young, the truly meek among us.

Amnesty was done before and it will be done, with compromise, again. You don't have to agree, but you will have to accept it. Better learn Spanish if you live in Calif. By the way, if you live in Piedmont, you are not in Valle's District like I am. We love him in this District and that was supposed to be part of the topic. You can tell your Sup. what to do, but you can't tell ours. He is doing exactly what most of us are suggesting to him and that's why we support him. Also, most Americans across this Nation support amnesty. Laws are not forever and will be changed when need be for just causes.

Amnesty will go down to defeat big time in the House.

I thought that the mother who posted really gets it.

Your 'answer' is open borders. Well news flash for you--we don't do that here in America.

If you're planning to stay in CA, better get your papers in order, otherwise ICE will be coming for you, too.

Get used to it.

I agree that this forum is for criticizing Dick Valley, and there just isn't much of anything that that guy gets right. We need Gail Steele again.


Get help!

These six will have a profound influence on the House killing amnesty. Dick Valley: get with the program!


Richard Valle is doing what we elected him to do, and what a majority of us want. You are in a very small minority. Get over yourself and get with the program.

Whether a 'majority' or 'minority,' wrong is wrong is wrong.

Must uphold the constitutions of both CA and USA. Not allowed to pick and choose your laws. Amnesty is subversion of the legislative process. We don't reward law-breakers. Not in America.

2:49 you make me laugh at your stubbornness. Do you always swim against the tide? California will soon be majority Hispanic, so get used to diversity because we will be better because of diversity. Yes, we will have another amnesty program. It's inevitable no matter if you and a few House members rail against it. Si Se Puede !

You sure are racist above. Who the hell brought up Hispanic?

As for against the tide, I swim with the current of what's right. Period.

Amnesty is a slap in the face and punch in the gut to every legal immigrant whoever came over from Guatemala, Ghana, or Great Britain. The great American melting pot is diverse. Don't try to confuse or soft-pedal.

The ONLY issue that is in play here is the law. You're too smart not realize that. You're very comfortable sticking your nose at the law. I am not. I was taught respect, both for process and one and all. The vast majority of House Republicans will vote down anything that even smacks of amnesty. Better get used to it. By the way, do tell us your solution for how to regulate immigration. Clue--open borders is a disqualification.

Aqui! Aqui!

Hitler hid behind the law and was also a racist like you 5:06. All the polls tell me you are a sore loser, because you will certainly lose this amnesty battle like you did before, when amnesty was granted. Start your crying now because the times are changing in the 21st century.

You are definitely Hitler reincarnated. You think like him. When given the facts and they don't suit you, you then bandy about 'racism,' 'boogeyman,' and anything else you can think of to stir things up.

You are a truly pathetic excuse of a 'human being' who prays on the basest instincts of others. I thank the good lord that individuals such as yourself are few and far between. When the truth is inconvenient, you cast aspersions--look up the word. Please do us all a favor and crawl back into the sewer from whence you came.

Wow--the little ability you have to think is shocking.6:14

It looks like little white male racist has a temper. Hitler was against people who were diverse from his expectations and so are you. Hitler would have been against amnesty and you definitely are. When the truth was inconvenient for you and faced with the facts you couldn't refute and the polls that are against you, you lost your temper and resorted to name calling. I learned a long time ago to stand up to bullies like you. It looks like you can dish it out, but like most bullies, can't take it. Talk about pathetic.

It will be interesting to see what you will say and do when amnesty is approved. You will have to move to a mostly white state like North Dakota. Hope you like cold winters !

Anon 6:14--I totally agree with my late night friend. On a lot of the topics in the citizen you start putting people down and calling them names when they disagree with your thinking. If you want a more civil discourse, try being more civil yourself. On some of the topics i have left the blog because of how you respond. It looks like you found someone that will stand up to you and your reaction was not pretty or unexpected. We all want to have an intelligent conversation, so try acting intelligently. You are way too antagonistic..

I definitely agree with 6:14. You two, or more likely the same disgruntled individual above, began with name calling. How dare he invoke Adolph Hitler and spew his anti-racist crap. This is not standing up. On the contrary, it is name calling and has shown that 12:18 and 12:50 have absolutely nothing of intelligence to offer.

They can't make a case for amnesty, but simply rally for it. They have no answer for why it didn't work in 1986 and would love to have a perpetual amnesty for life if they could. I agree with 6:14. The House definitely will vote it down when the entire House votes on it.

In the meantime, these little trolls who wouldn't know the meaning of racism if it stood up and saluted them with Zieg Heil, are truly pathetic. They need to go back under the rock they came out from and leave the scene to intelligent adults who don't act like the bully thugs whom they most definitely are. On behalf of all the adult non-thugs, I apologize to 6:14 for this outrageous behavior. I have friends in Berkelely, but reading these disgusting and caustic comments makes me almost ready to say back to Berkeley with you. I'm not willing to give them the satisfaction by writing Berkeley off at this time, which is exactly what these little Hitlers would like.

Amnesty will never happen. America doesn't reward law-breakers, which is what this is by definition.

Standing up for all of the legal immigrants who came to this country. Apologists for the illegals have nothing to offer except open borders, which they're too cowardly to list.

Anons 6:14, 8:36, &8:40--all the same person. I just read through this string of posts. You have a distinct writing style and seem to dominate this string. It seems you were the first one to mention Hitler, so shall we assume anything you said about someone else applies to you? I don't agree with everything that's been said about you, but I do think you where the first to start the name calling and trying to put people down. I also think of the facts and points made, and there weren't that many, you lost the argument. I too believe may 14th 12:38 was the best post and that's why amnesty will happen.

Steven--I think it's time to cut off this string of posts because it's deteriorated into name calling and is adding nothing new to the topic.

Nice try to deflect from yourself. You need to learn how to read, since YOU invoked Hitler and I called you on it. I give a lot better than I get. You want to start shit, you're going to get shit.

Your writing style lacks any semblance of consistency except for being an amnesty apologist. I don't name call, but you better believe that if someone goes off on me by invoking 'racism' and other shit that is anything but true, I'm going to call them out for the thugs they are.

As for the 'argument,' I'm on the side of rule of law. You choose to thumb your nose at it. Clearly you don't give a rat's ass about fairness and laws that apply to ALL. But that's o.k. If you want to live in a dream world, whatever.

Amnesty will be bandied about in the senate and house, but when the final vote happens on a reconciliation bill, it either will no longer have amnesty or will be killed in the house. Then you and Obama can cry your tears while the rest of us role up our sleeves to do the real work, which begins with deportation. Now there is a novel idea. Actually enforce the laws on the books.

Nice try to deflect from yourself. You need to learn how to read, since YOU invoked Hitler and I called you on it. I give a lot better than I get. You want to start shit, you're going to get shit.

Your writing style lacks any semblance of consistency except for being an amnesty apologist. I don't name call, but you better believe that if someone goes off on me by invoking 'racism' and other shit that is anything but true, I'm going to call them out for the thugs they are.

As for the 'argument,' I'm on the side of rule of law. You choose to thumb your nose at it. Clearly you don't give a rat's ass about fairness and laws that apply to ALL. But that's o.k. If you want to live in a dream world, whatever.

Amnesty will be bandied about in the senate and house, but when the final vote happens on a reconciliation bill, it either will no longer have amnesty or will be killed in the house. Then you and Obama can cry your tears while the rest of us role up our sleeves to do the real work, which begins with deportation. Now there is a novel idea. Actually enforce the laws on the books.

Anon 12:47--I changed my mind. You invoked Hitler first May 17th@8:11. Look it up--so now you are a LIAR for all to see as well as a racist white male a**hole.

I will LMAO when the compromise amnesty bill is passed. It may not be quite the Senate version but it will be close to it. It will happen because only a small minority of racists like you are opposed . Read the polls and then you can whine like a baby and crawl back to your parents couch and curl up into the fetal position while sucking your thumb. You're still living in the middle of the 20th Century. Are you sure you're not Paul Var Gas. You could be lying about that too.

You are the racist, but it's pathetic that you can't see that. I made a comparison to Nazi Germany as for the 'majority' going along. Such was National Socialism during the 1930s. You have chosen to incite by calling me a racist, disparaging me, telling me what you believe to be both my gender and ethnicity when you don't have a clue. As if that were in any way relevant.

All you can do is yell 'Amnesty will pass. Everybody wants it.' Well news flash, not everybody wants it, and I predict if the FACTS are exposed it will be a very tiny percentage of the American electorate who will rally for it. You have no solution for illegal immigration except to play the race card. For the record, for the umpteenth time, I support deporting anyone who has come to America illegally. Period. Now if you want to be factually correct and say "That person is against ALL the races, all human beings, both genders, all ages, all socio-economic backgrounds, etc. who have come to America by breaking through the borders, so be it. I'll own THAT statement and wear it proudly.

But don't you dare espouse your brand of shit by deflecting from a non-wining 'argument' by invoking race. No dice, kid. No different than the actual press, you must cite evidence and quotes, neither of which you have. Time for you to grow a spine, pay your taxes, and quit spewing your brand of hate.

You going dish shit? You're going to get it back in buckets. I promise you that. Any time you make lame, lying comments about me I will challenge your ass again and again and again.

You need to get mental help and I do believe you are Paul Var Gas who was defeated every time he ran for City Council. In other words completely rejected by the voters. And that's why the Rep. House members will pass some form of compromise amnesty plan along with the majority of Dems. in the House, because they don't want to be rejected by the large majority of voters that favor amnesty. BTW you are the one who started the dishing out of shit and making disparaging remarks. I will challenge your lying ass again and again. The truth hurts doesn't it?

You're the one with the non-winning arguments, or NO arguments at all except emotional ones. Here's the winning arguments which you won't acknowledge.

Five Reasons Immigration Reform Matters

1. Lives are at stake. Every day, the government deports more than 1,100 aspiring Americans—mothers, breadwinners, students—ripping families apart simply for trying to build a better life.2 Our broken immigration system keeps abused immigrants from seeking help, immigrant witnesses from testifying against criminals, and too many working in unsafe and illegal conditions. In a moral America, this must stop.

2. The economy will benefit. Legal status for 11 million would add $1.5 trillion to the U.S. economy via new tax revenue from the increased wages that workers with legal status earn. And Social Security would become more solvent, thanks to the $611 billion that immigrants would add to the system over the next 75 years.3

3. The right is going all out to kill it. Last time immigration reform seemed inevitable—in 2006 and 2007—a vocal conservative minority killed it. Roy Beck, director of the fearmongering nativist group NumbersUSA, has said that conservatives have sent more than 1 million faxes to Congress already this year, and more than 190,000 people have signed his group's petition against reform.4 If Roy Beck and friends are mobilizing to stop immigration reform, you can bet that's a sign that there's something progressive here that's worth fighting for.

4. We have the numbers to get real, meaningful, comprehensive immigration reform now. The 2012 election was a watershed victory for Latino, Asian-American, and progressive voters—thanks in part to MoveOn members' work—and we can't let anyone forget that. 71% of Latino voters and 73% of Asian-American voters cast their ballots for President Obama.5 The rising American electorate that helped elect President Obama is more diverse than ever and demanding real immigration reform—and voters are going to hold all politicians accountable for delivering on their promises.

5. We're here because a social movement has brought us here. From Arizona day laborers who stood up to armed vigilantes to immigrant young people known as DREAMers who risked arrest wearing their graduation caps and gowns—brave women, men, and children have risked everything to make this moment possible.6 They're asking us to stand with them, and it's time we answered their call.

Please share this with your friends and family—and talk about it at the dinner table tonight.

1. "Washington is deeply engaged with immigration. The public? Not so much." The Washington Post, May 1, 2013

2. "Opinion: Removing Non-Criminals from the Deportation Backlog Makes Us Safer," Fox News Latino, August 19, 2011

3. "Immigrants Are Makers, Not Takers," Center for American Progress, February 8, 2013

4. "Foes of immigration 'amnesty' mobilizing," USA Today, March 7, 2013

5. "The Facts on Immigration Today," Center for American Progress, April 3, 2013

6. "How to Close the Distance Between Washington and the Reality of Immigration," Huffington Post, May 2, 2013

As I've said all along and will continue to say, if you're going to invoke the race card, I will call your ass on it. Most readers of these comments realize that you have no argument other than open borders. I will challenge your lame brain each and every time, because the department of deportation ain't going away.

I see that you have now backtracked quite a bit. Don't like being called on the race card do you? Doesn't work when you can pin your garbage to someone who simply believes in the rule of law and favors all races equally. Well, in the end you might have learned a partial lesson, though the jury is still out on that one. As for your second post immediately above, all garbage. We don't simply say "Please break our laws and then we will be sure to reward you." Life doesn't work that way, sonny. When you grow up you might, just might learn that.

House will vote amnesty down if it ever goes that far. I'll write each and every time that you spew your amnesty crap. Not at all deterred.

Finally, who the hell is Paul Vargas? I see you're invoking someone with a Hispanic name. Are you continuing to play the race card? The truth will set you free--once amnesty is defeated, as it surely will be.

Let's see Dick Valley go along with the following:


After the catfight above, someone has to bring this back to topic.

Excellent article--just the facts, ma'am or sir!

Google Paul Vargas--he's not Hispanic. He lost every election he ran in by large margins. He spewed the same crap you do and the voters rejected him as they will to most people who vote against amnesty. I see you have NO argument against the reasons immigration reform matters as put forth in the 8:09 blog. What's a matter--can't you wrap your lame brain around the article. Your emotional argument is, but it's against the law. Try and read the compromise and understand this will provide reform to the law. Also, it has money in it to help secure the borders, which is impossible and a total waste of money, because most come in via legit ways and just stay. I know your brain isn't capable of handling too much pertinent info, but give it a try and read the 5 reasons and try and give an intelligent answer if possible.

Richard Valle is doing what we elected him to do. The voters in his district overwhelmingly support his position.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Far-reaching legislation to grant a chance at citizenship to millions of immigrants living illegally in the United States cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on a solid bipartisan vote Tuesday night after supporters somberly sidestepped a controversy over the rights of gay spouses.
The 13-5 vote cleared the way for an epic showdown on the Senate floor on the measure, which is one of President Barack Obama's top domestic priorities yet also gives the Republican Party a chance to recast itself as more appealing to minorities.
The committee's action sparked rejoicing from immigration activists who crowded into a Senate committee room to witness the proceedings. "Yes, we can!" they shouted as they clapped rhythmically to show their pleasure.
In addition to creating a pathway to citizenship for 11.5 million immigrants, the legislation creates a new program for low-skilled foreign labor and would permit highly skilled workers into the country at far higher levels than is currently the case.
At the same time, it requires the government to take costly new steps to guard against future illegal immigration.
In the hours leading to a final vote, the panel also agreed to a last-minute compromise covering an increase in the visa program for high-tech workers, a deal that brought Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah over to the ranks of supporters.
Under the compromise, the number of highly skilled workers admitted to the country would rise from 65,000 annually to 110,000, with the possibility of a further rise to 180,000, depending in part on unemployment levels.
Firms where foreign labor accounts for at least 15 percent of the skilled work force would be subjected to tighter conditions than companies less dependent on H-IB visa holders.
The compromise was negotiated by Hatch, whose state is home to a growing high tech industry, and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is designed to balance the interests of industry, which relies increasingly on skilled foreign labor, and organized labor, which represents American workers.
AFL-CIO President Rich Trumka attacked the deal sharply as "anti-worker," although he also made clear organized labor would continue to support the overall legislation.
Robert Hoffman, senior vice president for government affairs at the Information Technology Industry Council, welcomed the deal. "We obviously want to keep moving the bill forward and building support for the legislation, and this agreement allows us to do so," he said.
In a final reminder, an attempt by Sen. Ted Cruz., R-Texas, to delete the pathway to citizenship failed on a 13-5 vote.
In defeat, he and others said they, too, wanted to overhaul immigration law, but not the way that drafters of the legislation had done.
The centerpiece provision of the legislation allows an estimated 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally to obtain "registered provisional immigrant status" six months after enactment if certain conditions are also met.
Applicants must have arrived in the United States before Dec. 31, 2011, and maintained continuous physical presence, must not have a felony conviction of more than two misdemeanors on their record, and pay a $500 fine.
The registered provisional immigrant status lasts six years and is renewable for another $500. After a decade, though, individuals could seek a green card and lawful permanent resident status if they are up to date on their taxes and pay a $1,000 fine and meet other conditions.
Individuals brought to the country as youths would be able to apply for green cards in five years.

After reading a couple of these articles I agree some form of amnesty will occur. The question will be, what will be in the amnesty package? Answer to the writer who says it's against the law. Laws are changed every year in the state and in the US. You alone don't get to be the decider. Most of us want amnesty.

Most of us voted for Richard Valle because we like his progressive values, including those on amnesty which this article is supposed to be about.

Reform yes, but does not = amnesty.

You just don't get it, and clearly never will. Your amnesty is rewarding law breakers. Your amnesty is saying thank you for breaking our laws, if you wait long enough, not to worry, you'll become legal. Your amnesty is a slap in the face to every immigrant whoever took his or his turn at the back of the line and came to this country legally. Your amnesty is an insult to each and everyone of them, including any of your ancestors who came here legally. You just don't get it. THAT is the argument. We have a department of deportation. We need to use it. Try getting your lame brain around that one. As for articles, the one at 11:05 is the penultimate. That's the only article I need to wrap my arms around.

As for Dick Valley, I didn't vote for him and he doesn't represent the law, going against our sheriff who is enforcing the law--whether you like it or not! Valley's values are not progressive; they're illegal. Clearly you have no argument except advocating for open borders and apologizing for all the illegals, who would continue to come even if your amnesty was ever to be implemented. Did that in 1986 and that got us to this point. IT IS A LOSER, just like you. Rule of law is what defines our country, and I'll stand with it each and every time. That's the difference between you and I. I give a shit. You simply shit on those you don't agree with. Too bad for you. House will kill amnesty in final vote.

Finally, I don't give a crap as to who this Paul Vargas is. Means nothing to me.

Temper, temper oh mental one. You are losing the argument and you know it! The reform package put together by Republicans and Dems. does not have open borders in it, and if you don't know that, do some reading shit for brains. The house will pass their own compromise package of amnesty reform and then the Senate and House will put together an amnesty plan that will pass both houses. It will be signed into law later this year. It will be done because America wants it done except for a smaller and smaller minority of losers like you. LMAO

Try reading something worth the paper it's written on.

When you can't take issue with each and every point I've made, you've shown yet again the loser you are.

Amnesty is DOA in the House. Love to bet your fat ass into oblivion, if you only had some $$ to your anonymous name.

More respect for what's on the bottom of my shoe than you--though could be one in the same!


LAYFA--Laughing at your fat ass.

Try swallowing this Mr mental midget--you've made no points except you're a loser and won't reply to the dozens of points that disagree with you.

A bill that would be the most sweeping rewrite of America’s immigration laws in two decades not only passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 13-to-5 vote Tuesday night, but also sustained no dramatic alterations to the bipartisan framework fashioned by the bill’s authors, the “Gang of Eight.”
The bill did receive, however, a slew of tweaks and adjustments aimed at attracting more GOP support during its next key vote on the floor of the US Senate. Tuesday’s vote brought commentary from several key Republicans that augur well for the bill’s prospects.

“I appreciate the work of the Senate Judiciary Committee in taking the bill my colleagues and I introduced in April as a starting point for debate and making improvements to it over the past few weeks,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R) of Florida in a statement after the bill’s passage. “Through an extensive, open and transparent process, they have made real improvements to the bill.”

Senator Hatch’s support of the bill in committee came after he and Senator Schumer hashed out a deal on a handful of amendments that Hatch wanted regarding high-skilled workers, long of interest to the veteran Utahn. These measures would make it easier for technology companies and others to hire the talented but temporary workers that come through the H-1B program.

Hatch also secured a compromise amendment requiring a test of a biometric entry-exit system at America’s 10 largest airports in the next two years, followed by an expanded test at the 30 largest US airports four years later. A biometric system, which could capture a foreign traveler’s fingerprints or scan his or her iris, was a frequently cited desire of Republican members of the panel.

The committee adopted other conservative changes to the bill that may accentuate its appeal to Republicans on the Senate floor. These changes include the stipulation that the Department of Homeland Security must turn back or apprehend 90 percent of would-be border crossers along the entire Southern border – not just in high-risk sectors as the bill originally required – before the nation’s millions of illegal immigrants can become citizens.
The changes were only a handful of the more than 200 amendments that the committee considered over five days and more than 30 hours of debate and votes. About a third of the 141 changes that were approved came from the panel’s conservative senators.

The process drew acclaim from even the most deep-seated opponents of the legislation, with several Republican senators thanking Judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D) of Vermont in their closing comments for organizing what the panel’s ranking Republican, Charles Grassley (R) of Iowa, called a “productive debate.”

Two of the bill’s critics in the Judiciary Committee, Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas and Senator Grassley, both said they would vote affirmatively to move to debate on the bill. Such support makes it all but guaranteed that the measure has a quick route to further amendments on the Senate floor when Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada takes the measure up after the Memorial Day recess.

The fact that senators on both sides see a pressing need to move legislation forward even if they don’t agree with all of it was embodied best by Grassley, who said he would have voted for the bill if it meant the difference between it dying in committee or being sent to the full Senate.

With a broken immigration system, Grassley said, it’s incumbent on Congress to give the issue the fullest hearing possible – passing bills in both chambers and then untangling the differences in a conference committee.

He added, “If this system is broken, we all ought to take every opportunity we can ... to make sure it is fixed and fixed right.”

This means there will be amnesty or immigration reform, it's just not clear what will be in the new law yet. The house and Senate will agree on a compromise and it will be signed by the President. I hope the blogger at 1:36 didn't bet too much money against amnesty as he seems to be an unstable person and I wouldn't want to see anyone hurt.

Sorry, loser. You continue to be unable to read. I've made plenty of points, all of with which you disagree. Fine. This is still America. You bet for amnesty and open borders. I don't. The House will vote eventually, and then you'll know not that I am right but more importantly that you're wrong. You've been wrong all along. Hey, you're from Berkeley. What else is there to say. The rest of America isn't. Heard the news again today on NPR that the chances for any amnesty being in a final reconciliation bill is nill to none. The vote will happen and any yelling until that vote happens is all hot air on your part. Try mellowing a little, will do you a tad better, but only a tad.

There will be reform, if the amnesty-lovers are ready to jettison. If they don't, nothing happens. Just talk. Too bad you can't join reality instead of floating on your dream cloud. Also, your attempt to change your 'style' from 3:16 to 9:13--six hours later, does nothing to fool me. You're the same hothead with his head up his ass. Try getting with the ticket, kid.

Your hyperbole and propaganda influences and sways no one. America doesn't tolerate such shit. This time try reading what I've given you. You might actually get a perspective of what Americans want and what they won't tolerate.



zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz-----You are sooooooooo boring! You want to talk about losers who can't read -try looking in the mirror. I did post 3:16 but didn't post 9:13 and I'm not from Berkeley. You are so mentally deranged you are now talking to yourself-asking and answering your own questions. Nice try but no cigar. Actually if you could read you will know that the bipartisan compromise does not have open borders or blanket amnesty. But hey, why confuse you with the facts of what the compromise reform amnesty package contains. You seem to know better than the Republicans and Democrats that compromised and put the package together. Try not to be so LAZY and actually read the damn thing if you can. Almost ALL of America is against you if you look at the polls. Try pulling your head out of where the sun doesn't shine and start reading. LMFAO at your lack of mental capability. OMG

Aqui? Aqui?---Talking to yourself again 10:15? Wow

Looks like 12:59, 1:03 et al.--all the same loser-- continues to deflect. Hey, the jerk from Berkeley. Whatever.

Hint, while we know you are anxious to 'persuade' the masses that your amnesty and zealot appeal for open borders might become the law of the land--not in your lifetime--at least try to have some patience before you post and re-post. Four minutes in between?

Temper. Temper.


I was trying to mimic your posts and reposts, not trying to cover up. BTW I don't HAVE to convince the masses, all the polls show the masses are convinced on the compromise amnesty reform package. It's only the cave men that are not. I will repeat again to help you try and grasp a simple fact--the compromise does NOT have open borders, but you will have to READ the amnesty reform package in order understand that fact. So who's the loser? Most would say it's the one too lazy to read the package! Temper. Temper, oh mental one.
p.s. I live in Valle's district, but have nothing against any city including Berkeley.

Since YOU care not to read the real deal, I've taken the liberty to share some factual reading. THIS is exactly why the House majority, not the committee, will be voting amnesty down. As for open borders, this is what YOU believe in. Anyone who favors amnesty for law-breakers is on record for supporting open borders. When you tell someone who breaks the law, 'Hey, don't worry. Just lie low for the next 27 years, and we'll legalize you,' that by definition is open borders. Sorry you can't grasp that. We need to keep the dept. of deportation folks employed and let them do their job. There are consequences for breaking the law, and deportation is the prescribed remedy for entering the USA illegally.

Please don't let the facts confuse your fantasy.

Americans don’t want blanket amnesty for illegal aliens

By Frosty Wooldridge:

While Congress and Obama push for mass amnesty, the American people do not want to be flooded with 12 to 20 million more unskilled, uneducated people ushered into the United States.

The majority of law-abiding, taxpaying American citizens understand that legalizing 12 to 20 million illegal aliens will create a “Human Katrina Hurricane” flooding into the United States. Ironically, with 47 million Americans subsisting on food stamps and another 14 million unemployed Americans—it makes no sense to legalize a minimum of 12 million foreigners that will tap directly into America’s jobs, Social Security, health care, assisted housing, welfare and educational systems.

What irks me stems from the statement, “Our immigration laws are broken.” Fact: our immigration laws have not been enforced for over 30 years. They crash our borders with impunity. They work illegally with immunity. Illegal migrant employers like McDonald’s, Hormel, Tyson Chicken, Chipotle’s, Marriott Hotels, construction firms and more—get away with endless crime of forged Social Security cards, fraudulent cash payments and displacement of Americans citizens from jobs.

If Obama wins an amnesty, we all lose. We lose because he won’t enforce any “new” immigration laws. That will encourage millions of desperate people around the world to flood faster into the United States. We are no longer a sovereign country, but a destination.

Not considered by Congress, that 12 to 20 million illegal migrants will be able to bring in at least 10 of their immediate family through “family reunification.” That will accelerate the flood of humanity into the tens of millions beyond the original amnesty.

The Center for Immigration Studies, www.cis.org , announced the results of a national survey that found 52 percent of likely voters want illegal aliens to their home countries. Only 33 percent preferred they be given legal status. The results, which were published in a new CIS report, are based on polling conducted by Pulse Opinion Research.

“Poll wording matters. Most post-election polls on immigration policy have given the public the false choice of conditional legalization or mass deportations. This poll uses neutral wording that allows us to know the views of the American public,” said Dr. Steven Camarota, CIS’ Director of Research. “With border security and the enforcement of immigration laws being a key issue with legislators, the fact that 70 percent of those polled were not confident that immigration law would be enforced if there is legalization and 69 percent believed providing legal status to illegals would encourage more illegal immigration is a good indicator of public sentiment.”

Among the findings of the survey:

Of those who want illegal immigrants to return home, 73 percent said that they felt “very strongly” about their view, while just 35 percent of those who support legalization said they felt very strongly about their view.

One reason the public may prefer that illegal aliens go home is a strong belief that immigration laws have not been enforced — 64 percent said that enforcement of immigration laws has been “too little”, while just 10 percent said that it had been too much, and 15 percent said it was “just right”.

When asked why there is a large illegal population, voters overwhelming (71 percent) thought it was because we had not made a real effort to enforce our immigration laws. Only 18 percent said it was because we didn’t allow in enough legal immigrants.

About two-thirds of voters (69 percent) agreed with the statement that “giving legal status to illegal immigrants does not solve the problem because rewarding law breaking will only encourage more illegal immigration.” Just 26 percent disagreed.

Only 27 percent of voters expressed confidence that immigration laws would be enforced in the event of a legalization, while 70 percent said they were not confident laws would be enforced.

53 percent said they would be more likely to support a political party that supports immigration law enforcement while 32 percent indicated that they would be more likely to support a party that supports legalization.

We Americans must ask ourselves if we want our country continuously flooded with an endless line of legal and illegal immigrants. If we don’t we must take action.

You are not alone with your concern about America’s future. You can take action. Join www.CapsWeb.org ; www.CIS.org ; www.NumbersUSA.org ; www.Fairus.org

© Copyright by Frosty Wooldridge, 2013. All rights reserved.

For the readers who don't know who Frosty Wooldridge is I invite you to google him. NOW, I'm sure the poster of 8:36, 1:01, 1:02 and most of the posts against the amnesty reform compromise, is a RACIST right-wing nut job. Get off this blog you extremist piece of shit. Steven-cut him off! OMG

Eugenicist Frosty Wooldridge has the rabid right all atwitter!

Eugenicist, potential domestic terrorist and rabid right nutcase Frosty Wooldridge crawled out from under his rock recently with an article that has all the whackos from ALIPAC to VDARE in a tizzy.

Titled Swallowing a scorpion from Mexico: immigration invasion of US, he stirs the shit and speaks of the fantasies of the rabid right. Invasions, Reconquistas, slandering Hispanic politicians who reject his view of how the world should be. The same Frosty garbage, regurgitated once again.

They are not assimilating, not speaking English, not respecting our laws, paying taxes, driving with licenses, carrying insurance or investing as American citizens. That’s why California suffers $23 billion debt! That’s why your tax dollars pay out $346 billion annually for immigration across 15 federal agencies according to the imminent economist Edwin Rubenstein. (Source: www.thesocialcontract.com)

The same hate speech that spawned the likes of Shawna Forde and her mentality of hatred for Mexicans, legal or otherwise.

HE goes on with his rant to allege treason, when the treasonous behavior is his, although unfortunately protected by the 2nd Amendment.

If that doesn’t amount to treason within our own country, I don’t know what does. This invasion manifests Third World Momentum. Mexicans can’t run their own country with any degree of success, so, they overrun our country with their desperately poor, diseased and dispossessed. From historical perspective, you can expect that the new Aztlan will be much like the quagmire of Mexico City—transplanting itself into our country.

Obviously, this moron has never set foot in Mexico City and seen the vibrant modern city that exists.

And ending his rant, he shows his love and association with FAIR, NumbersUSA and the hate filled Social Contact rag.

But are people swallowing Wooldridge’s vocal vomit? They don’t seem to be. Comments are running 100% against his racist rant!

Too bad that you can't read. Nothing racist here. Man says he's against ILLEGAL immigration, and he's an environmentalist to boot.

I actually READ the preceding posted article.

Gets my vote!

More on Frosty Wooldrige the right-wing extremist and racist --now we know why you are mentally unbalanced 8:06

AGE: 58

The author of hundreds of opinion columns, Frosty Wooldridge believes he knows a thing or two about immigration. It's not a pretty picture he paints.

Cock-fighting, animal sacrifice, Santeria sorcery, staged dog fights -- these are some of the nasty things illegal aliens bring us, Woolridge writes in his 2004 book Immigration's Unarmed Invasion: Deadly Consequences. There's genital mutilation -- clitorectomies -- that come to us courtesy of illegal non-European immigrants ("What if your daughter married a man who insisted your granddaughter undergo this operation?"). If you go to places like Wal-Mart or the movies, he warns, "you're breathing air that may be carrying hepatitis." Tuberculosis, head lice and hepatitis are showing up in our classrooms -- part of what Wooldridge calls immigrants' "disease jihad." Thanks to donations from illegals, blood supplies may be contaminated with a deadly parasite that will destroy your heart.

Not worried yet about the ways of "barbaric" immigrants? Consider the toilet habits of the undocumented. Somali immigrants, Wooldridge warns, "never used a toilet or washed their hands before being plunked down in America." Mexicans "do not wash their hands after using bathroom facilities." Then Wooldridge suggests in his book that readers think about just who it is who prepares their food.

An Army veteran, Wooldridge claims to have written articles for 18 magazines, along with "hundreds" of editorials in major American newspapers. He says he bicycled 100,000 miles through six continents over the course of 25 years. He has taught math and science and has been a tractor-trailer driver, bartender, dance teacher, ski instructor, heavy equipment trainer, cardiac catheterization technician, personal trainer and lifestyle coach. He has appeared on scores of television and radio shows. But what he does not have is any background in immigration.

That hasn't prevented him from offering up his opinions. "I don't want to see my country taken over ... and have them make the Southwest a slime pit Third World country like Mexico," he told a Las Vegas audience in early 2005. Later, in a letter to the editor, he complained about California, "with its nightmare gridlock, schools trashed, hospitals collapsing, drug gangs and overall chaos generated by a Third World mob of illegal aliens." U.S. borders should have been sealed to legal and legal immigration the day after the Sept. 11 attacks, Woolridge added on one Web site. If that doesn't happen soon, he said, "this country will collapse into internal civil conflict in this decade."

NO environmental organization would claim him--stop your lying 8:06

Nice of you and your brethern trying character assassination. My, how the would-be-'mighty' have fallen. Temper, temper.

The man supports legal immigration of all people, abortion rights, and the environment. Gets my vote again and again.

Too bad that you can't trash a real American hero for all. He gets it, just like the House will get it.

Better take your blood pressure meds.

Yeah, the Kennedys and MLK were tashed by their haters, too. Frosty gets it.

I invite everyone to google him and judge for themselves--If he's anyones hero they are far to the extreme of right -wing racists. Please read 2:24 and 2:44 to find out about Frosty Wooldridge who is beloved by white separatists and every racist blogger. Anon 8:06 and 2:59 you have shown your true colors and you are a right-wing lying racist male and I want everyone to know that.

Here's the truth readers who aren't racists.

Anti-Immigrant Front Group Courts Progressives With Shoddy Polling Data

Andrea Nill, at The WONK ROOM shines the light on the underhanded manner that the anti-immigrant movement will go to in order to deceive the American public regarding the facts of the immigration debate

The deceptively named anti-immigrant front group, Progressives for Immigration Reform(PFIR), released a set of counter-intuitive polling data today suggesting that while over half of 600 polled liberals support a pathway to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the US, they also see immigration as an economic, social, and environmental liability.

The anti-immigration movement has long been trying to woo progressives by exploiting pro-labor and environmental arguments to make the case against immigrants. TheCenter for New Community’s (CNC) Eric Ward warns:

“PFIR is simply another addition to a growing list of anti-immigrant groups being set up under the Tanton Network to give the illusion that the anti-immigrant movement is broader than it really is. This network of organizations is named after white nationalist John Tanton the founder and key leader in a network of anti-immigrant organizations, spin-offs and front groups. Key entities include Center for Immigration Studies, Social Contract Press, and the Coalition for the Future American Worker.”

PFIR’s Executive Director Leah Durant is listed as the Federation for American Immigration Reform’s (FAIR) Legal Analyst. Frank Morris, PFIR’s vice president, is also a board member of the Center for Immigration Studies and sits on FAIR’s national board of advisors. According to the CNC, PFIR’s “sister group,” the House Immigration Reform Caucus, chaired by Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray (CA), has an abominable voting record on environmental and labor issues.

According to the poll, 67% of liberals/progressives feel that immigration causes population growth which “negatively impacts the quality of life.” 58% feel that immigration is environmentally harmful and 63% think immigration hurts American workers. Yet over half support a pathway to citizenship.

PFIR’s confusing findings might also have something to do with their polling company, “Pulse Opinion Research,” the favored pollster of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a group which was recently pinned for fueling hate crimes with its anti-immigrant rhetoric and the Eagle Forum, a “pro-family” organization that opposes the “liberal agenda,” “radical feminists,” and supports “American identity.” The pollster has also been used to promote the presidential bids of Libertarian candidates Bob Barr andGeorge Phillies. Yet, while Pulse Opinion Research’s findings were used to predict the relative success of Barr and Phillies, Phillies lost his bid for the Libertarian Party’s nomination to Barr who only won 0.4% of the national vote — compared to the 7% win that Pulse Opinion Research predicted.

Very convenient that you want folks to read your trash propaganda. How about reading the legitimate words that the man himself wrote--1:01-1:02. Should set the record straight. Those are his own words, not some moron like you who loves to invoke 'racist' every time you come up against something you don't agree with or more to the point, don't understand.

When you're watching the show on the big screen and you don't want folks to be able finish watching, just pull the fire alarm and yell "FIRE!" That's exactly what you're doing. No dice. We're not

The man believes in legal immigration--check; believes in abortion--check; supports the environment--triple check. Now that's a TRUE progressive in anyone's book.

3:29 continued

Most immigration polling backs the claim that the majority of Americans support a legalization program for undocumented immigrants. Yet, it’s hard to find any polling that shows the same respondents holding immigrants responsible for the nation’s woes. According to a Benenson Strategy Group poll, 71% of 1,000 likely voters said that immigrants are not responsible for taking American jobs. A poll conducted by Bendixon and Associates for the progressive think tank, the New Democratic Network (NDN), found that 60% of voters in four battleground states echoed similar views. Both surveys were bi-partisan polls that consistently showed Democrats leaning towards pro-immigrant views and solutions. None of polls connected immigration to environmental or population growth concerns, however the progressive Green Party itself specifically condemns scapegoating immigrants for social and environmental problems:

“While we recognize that there must be some controls on immigration, if only for the sake of national security, the Green Party would endorse a friendlier (less intimidating) attitude towards immigration in all nations within certain guidelines…We oppose those who seek to divide us for political gain by raising ethnic and racial hatreds, and by blaming immigrants for social and economic problems.”

Polling data aside, US government scientists say there’s insufficient evidence to draw any clear conclusion on immigration’s impact on the environment.

Let's do a draft Frosty for supervisor in 2014.

Got my vote!

You are a racist and white separatist just like it appears wooldridge is--you are the company you keep-- we will let the readers and people who google him judge him and you for what you are!

I now know I'm wasting my time trying to educate a white racist moron.

Readers judge for yourselves----over and out

Post a Comment