I remembered this short but important part of Ted Cruz’s speech last year at the Lincoln Day Dinner in Miami. It was part of a thoroughly enjoyable evening, and appropriate for the occasion on my mind. What is America? And what makes one American? Some people wonder why I call myself Cuban-American. Two reasons. First, I am proud to be from the country where I came from. My maternal country is my roots and what makes me who I am to a great degree. Second, as a citizen who is here legally, I am also proud to distinguish myself from groups who are less overt about expressing where they are from, for whatever reason. I know that my family obtained citizenship not by cheating or extorting politicians, so I’m proud to be part of the type of immigration that makes America great. The hyphenated term is to help Americans understand a little better that not all Hispanics want to change America. We don’t attempt to subvert the laws that make it great, either. That is wrong. On the contrary, this country inspires us to offer all we have in return for the laws that protect its freedoms which we don’t take for granted. What we experienced in our country has shaped us. We are American, but it also doesn’t mean we ignore politics.
If a group of individuals is thankful for this country, and are willing to sacrifice, share and be a part of the what makes it great, then so be it. We are grateful this country gave us refuge from political persecution. I know we never came for the goodies or benefits. In fact, we expected to return within a year and it has become 56 so far. The Cuban Embassy in Washington opened on July 21st and there is still persecution in Cuba. It is not free. I know American’s know that, but with an election ahead I will get out of the way what I want to get out the way so we can discuss other things we can do to keep this country as free as possible.
I don’t see how the extreme polarity and lack of consensus in the Republican party will help us in 2016. Look, I’m not a candidate kind of a gal. I’m into context. Candidates are like flavors people choose to love one day, hate the next. That is part of the problem. Voters have too many options. I have seen the last four years as an experiment, one which shows the need for government in many ways, and one in which the struggle for freedom, still very much on the minds of Americans, needs to be focused like a razor on. But the grassroots is disorganized despite all the passion. We need an establishment to hate it because it is trying to oppress us, but we need to understand its rightful place as well. The argument we have tried to make is for self-government. But people need order. They need rules. Without them they don’t always govern themselves accordingly.
If I sound pessimistic it’s because people do not take responsibility for their actions. When you abuse the freedom to act responsibly, of course, government will step in and capitalize on it. America has been a free for all. Self-interest is so distracting that it leaves little or no time to watch the foxes in the coop, permitting government to get away with what it does. Let’s face it. People get discouraged when they see the same politicians making the same promises and the same “leaders” making the same demands and not getting anywhere because they lie and we end up more disenfranchised. Of course when we vote we hope politicians will do their jobs so we can lead our own. But they don’t. And haven’t.
Conservatives are about pursuing their dreams and not much about the greater good. Why not? It’s a great question. How about a combination of a little more of number two? I am not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that people can govern themselves accordingly given no restrictions. So we need to deal with this: We need guidelines. We need to uphold principles, but not in a way that threatens the very people we turn to when the time comes where we need them to protect us. When war comes. Can we live without government? NO. Maybe I am missing something. I just think the type of chaos I am perceiving will lead to harsher, bigger government. I hope I’m wrong. How can we create a consensus, though, when the divided states of America seem like one big border-less mess!
People confuse a country with its government or politicians. I will never confuse who is doing what is right, but I understand that it doesn’t matter who it is, it matters what is being done that is right. That is my compass. I’m going to vote for the Republican nominee whoever it is (it will not be our choice most probably – nothing has changed nor will it so why not accept it) and stop this silly mindset that you should take the fight for standing for what is right on the big day at the ballot box. How about accepting the nominee for who he/she is and focus and concentrate on ways to deal with that candidate’s record to continue the problem-solving, the taking stands, instead of the childish and endless whining.
I digressed. Getting back to the little clip. It’s pretty darn cool that a room full of immigrants or children of immigrants are represented by two Americans with their background in the Republican presidential primary. We all came penniless, only with a few items like photos and clothes, but penniless, and filled with hopes it was just a short visit and soon we’d be back home. It never happened. I don’t speak for anyone but the fact is, it is deeply embedded in our psyche, whether individually or collectively. I hope it is not misconstrued for support one candidate or the other. That would be missing the point. It is something to be proud of and I admit I am. I wish there were another woman running, but I digress there, too. If she had been a Cuban-American, maybe having experienced the permanent loss of her country, maybe she would have seized the opportunity that our two senators did. Far be it from me to speculate there. I dare not. All I know is many people wanting to be here appreciate the opportunities America offers possibly more than others already living here who take them for granted.
To finish this long “short” introduction, I thought I’d add a definition which I found to be insightful and eloquent, not to mention true, of what America means, by the woman who could be a more integral part of the political process.
We heard about an illegal immigrant lawyer this week who vowed to run for President (It’s true. He has a license to practice law without U.S. citizenship):
Cesar Vargas, 31, who lives on Staten Island, emigrated to the United States when he was five but has never obtained U.S. citizenship. He posted his ambitions on The Hill, writing, “I am neither a U.S citizen nor 35 years old, so an official candidacy is currently not possible. But Vargas added that he hopes that the constitutional amendment requiring presidents be natural-born citizens of the United States will be changed.
Vargas was recently arrested for trespassing in Iowa when he attended the Iowa Freedom Summit and asked New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie a question. Hilariously, as a non-citizen, he claimed that the U.S. Constitution protected his right to ask the question.
The New York court, ignoring the fact that Vargas has no U.S. citizenship, granted him a license to practice law, writing, “We find that the undocumented status of an individual applicant does not, alone, suggest that the applicant is not possessed of the qualities that enable attorneys to vigorously defend their client’s interests within the bounds of the law, nor does it suggest that the applicant cannot protect, as an officer of the court, the rule of law and the administration of justice.” Read the more of the story.
Well we’re not too far off from that scenario if you think about it. It’s vaguely close (as are these cases concerning legality sometimes). As we mock Jeb Bush or throw sticks and stones at him verbally for his comments in the past, he went on record this week telling José Díaz Balart on Noticiero Telemundo (owned by NBC), in an interview conducted completely in Spanish, that he was “hurt” by Donald Trump’s divisive comments about Mexicans, that his family was discriminated against growing up in Florida, that he vowed to enact comprehensive immigration reform in his first term as president and that deportation is not an American value. (English transcript). We don’t realize how much sense it all makes sense when you read the neatly embedded story within a story below:
Jeb Bush is married to Columba, whose relatives, including her father, entered the U.S. illegally to find work in Califronia according to the article below. Although I cannot confirm if laws didn’t exist after World War II to stop illegals from crossing the border and working without papers, he eventually became a legalized alien. In the article which is carefully crafted, Columba is depicted as a modern day Cinderella, the next possible Latina First Lady, but doesn’t come right out and say that she may have been illegal herself. It hints her family was. From The Washington Post (Highlights mine):
Last year, Jeb caught flak from conservatives in his own party when he said that many of those who cross the border illegally do so as an “act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family.”
His own father-in-law had made that journey, as did many of Columba’s relatives, walking across the border decades ago to get work in California.
View of 2001 El Heraldo newspaper clippings announcing that Jose Maria Garnica Rodriguez, the father of Columba Bush, had his photo taken for an article about him meeting then-President George W. Bush in San Cristobal, Mexico, and at right a newspaper article picturing Noelle Bush, daughter of Columba Bush. (Linda Davidson/The Washington Post)
Jose Maria Garnica Rodriguez, who died at 88 in 2013, grew up in Arperos, not far from this city famous for its leather boots and clothes. It is reachable by a hilly dirt road. He helped his family grow corn and avocados until he left for the United States, like so many other men and women did from his poor village.
After World War II, it was common to cross the border without proper papers, said Columba’s uncle, Antonio Garnica Rodriguez, who made the trek, too. “We just went across the border, worked, stayed there for a while and came back.”
He said his brother later joined the “bracero” program, which allowed manual laborers temporary legal entry to the United States. Jose Maria got his “resident alien” card on Feb. 4, 1960. It indicates that his point of entry was El Paso, Tex. He moved back to Mexico in the 1980s.
The card that legalized him is still in his brown leather wallet, in his widow’s home, along with his ID for the Laborers International Union of North America Local 300 in Los Angeles, and a black-and-white photo of Columba as a teen.
According to both sides of the family, Columba’s parents had a loveless, stormy relationship. Her mother, Josefina Gallo Esquivel, came from a wealthier family in León.
Their marriage formally dissolved in 1963, leaving their shy, deeply religious 10-year-old daughter feeling stigmatized and set apart from other children in a conservative Catholic city.
As a result,
Some of her father’s relatives say that Columba has kept her distance because she is embarrassed about her humble roots. Read the rest of the story here.
I’ve set out to be nothing but amicable in the process of the GOP nomination this year. You know, to give the best possible chances of winning this election to Republicans. As much as I can’t stand Jeb Bush, I will to the best of my ability try to humanize him as much as possible (like Sarah Palin did on her Facebook wall the night he announced he was running), but it’s not possible to stomach his views politically.
I have gone to great lengths to explain to people why I say I’m a proud Cuban-American: to remind others that we came here legally. In sum, we reluctantly left a country we expected to go back to and considered ourselves temporary guests here. There has never been an attempt to subvert the system or change this country’s demographics. On the contrary, some of us are more patriotic and capitalist-loving than many Americans would even know. Jeb Bush knows that.
His family is in a prominent position and should know better than to depict illegality as acts of love. Maybe for his family after the War it was considered an act of love, a means to an end, but it has been perverted into a nasty game politician’s play for scoring votes.
I’m always open to reading about the nice things about the Bushes, but honestly, the more I look, the less I like, and the more I read, as shown above, the more questions I have. If laws didn’t exist back then to stop you from entering the country, why were the term illegality and that journey used in the excerpt. I don’t know. The way it was presented is what bothered me. It is vague. And why try to manipulate our emotions with the beginning and end of the story?
The message we must send to those who are running: How can we take our party back if those at the top are pushing illegality? I hope that even if we lose as Conservatives, that it is perfectly clear that we are the rule, not the exception in being against amnesty. I am sick to death of the preferential treatment for law breakers. So are 64% of Americans.
There is no case to be made in favor of any candidate who condones this. We need to be spoken to like adults, not children. And it should not be glossed over in the debates (which Telemundo is a part of). No one will, I hope.
No wonder the GOP is so weak-kneed to talk about the issue. I joke about the deep bench being mostly VP applicants for Jeb, but it’s important to respect the process as well. Candidates who are doing so are probably afraid to bring it all up as they know leader-of-the-party Bush would not concur.
The goal for them should be to win the respect of the People (even if Jeb is the inevitable nominee) by representing us and what we believe: that the laws that protect us as Americans should be respected! One family may have a Cinderella-type story to tell, but acts of love belong in the bedroom. Politics should not be in the love story business.
And amnesty should not be a love letter to one’s spouse at the expense of subverting the laws of the country you are trying to protect. It’s so screwed up! If something is wrong, it should be wrong no matter who you are or what position you have. Amnesty is wrong. Illegality is wrong. Our politicians are wrong to support either.
Jeb BushHappy anniversary to my beautiful wife of 41 years, Columba. True story: This is the only picture from our wedding. The photographer, my brother Marvin, accidentally rerolled from a Frank Zappa concert. Thankfully, my mom took one photo with a Kodak.February 23
The first GOP presidential debate is just around the corner (only ten days from now). The ball is already rolling, so it would be curious to see how many of the candidate/s would offer Sarah Palin a cabinet position she would accept in their administration should he/she become POTUS? Your responses as vote results can be seen immediately and anonymously. Thank you for your participation.
On July 21st, 2015, Republican Governor of Ohio, John Kasich, declared a run for president (making a total of 16 GOP nominees!) I kind of joked about it on my wall saying most of the candidates are there to run for Jeb’s VP slot since he is the inevitable choice the RNC will back. But really, every politician except the one who should be in the race, is in the race. So that begs the question: Why doesn’t Sarah Palin just declare a run? What is keeping her from doing so?
Even Donald Trump, who I do not consider politically trustworthy, shares an opinion that could be considered unanimous by all Sarah Palin supporters: “I don’t even think she knows how important she is.” This is the full quote:
“I can tell you she’s just an amazing woman. She is given great credit, but she should be given even more credit because she is someone that people respect and admire. She speaks to so many people. I don’t even think she knows how important she is. And maybe that is part of the beauty of Sarah Palin, but I just see it all over. So many people revere her, so I think it’s great. I think she is terrific.”
Introduction: Señoras y señores, denle la bienvenida al condecorado con la Medalla de Oro, el Sargento Dakota Meyer.
Dakota Meyer: Muchas gracias. Yo quisiera darle las gracias a todos nuestros veteranos y a los cónyugues de militares, también a las familias estrella de oro en el público hoy. Nuestra siguiente invitada no necesita una presentación formal. Pero quiero decir que me sentí muy honrado cuando la Gobernadora Palin me pidió que la presentara.
Yo quiero hablarles un poquito sobre la Gobernadora Palin que yo conozco, que no sólo sirve al público; pero que también es una madre, una esposa, y la madre de un miembro activo en el ejército. Y esto es importante porque hoy día, menos de medio porcentaje de la población – así es, el .5%, sirve en el ejército.
Y a pesar de eso, tenemos políticos en cada partido que se creen expertos en política exterior y quieren comprometer al ejército de EE.UU. cada vez que hay una pelea en el jardín de niños entre dos barones del petróleo en el Medio Oriente.
Y miren. Nosotros no le tenemos miedo a combatir, de ninguna manera. Confíen en mí en eso. Pero ¿por qué no nos dan una lucha que podríamos ganar? Una lucha.. Una lucha donde los políticos y los burócratas se quedan fuera de nuestro camino, porque nosotros lo haremos.
Ese .5% de la población está llevando la carga del 95.5% de este país. Hemos oído mucho hablar del 98% y del 2% en los medios por parte de estos políticos. Pero ¿saben qué? Están hablando de dinero, de lo rico o pobres que somos, del tamaño de refresco que podemos tomar, de quién ganó y quién perdió.
Pero ¿saben de lo que nadie está hablando? Del .5%. ¿Y saben qué? Está bien. Porque nosotros, el .5%, estamos orgullosos de servir. Porque gracias al servicio de tantos de los hombres y las mujeres de nuestro país, Washington tiene la libertad de discutir lo que Washington considera importante discutir.
Washington puede estar ahí y preocuparse de quién consiguió la asignación al comité, a quién lo invitaron a qué fiesta y a quién le dieron el desaire.. y a quién lo cogieron desprevenido por la cámara.
Pero aquellos de nosotros como Track Palin que sirvió en Irak, y como la Gobernadora Palin, una madre que se quedó desvelada muchas noches preocupándose por lo impensable – si su hijo regresaría a casa..
Pues, seguiremos sirviendo.
Y ahora muchos de ustedes estarán pensando ¿Adónde va esto? ¿Va a presentar a la Gobernadora Palin o no?
Pero digo todo esto para demostrar algo. La increíble mujer que estoy presentando, la Gobernadora Palin, sabe lo que los veteranos han estado pasando y lo que sus familias están pasando. Ella sabe que no somos unos casos de caridad, y que no queremos nada más que servir a nuestra gran nación.
Ella sabe que cuando la campana se toque de nuevo, nosotros estaremos listos. Estaremos presente.
Nosotros estaremos preparados para responder otra vez a las ordenes de la nación en un instante, y lo que sea necesario para defender nuestros derechos como americanos, pero también los menos afortunados que nosotros en el mundo.
Ella lo sabe porque lo ha vivido. Señoras y señores, por favor den la bienvenida a la Gobernadora Palin.
Governor Sarah Palin
Gracias. Estoy contenta de estar aquí. Muchísimas gracias. Me siento tan honrada de estar aquí..
Muchas gracias. Y me siento muy honrada de poder hablar sobre los mejores de los Estados Unidos, nuestros veteranos. A mí me pidieron que hablara sobre los veteranos. Y yo dije, absolutament! Que tema tan cercano y querido a mi corazón.
Sargento Dakota Meyer, le agradezco muchísimo esa presentación. Su servicio desinteresado nos hace recordar ese amor, ese amor patriótico sobre el cual este país fue construido. Su servicio desinteresado nos inspira. Él y su generación de veteranos nos recuerda esa valentía que fundó este país.De hecho, quisiera hacerles un cuento de los primeros veteranos de América, y lo que el tocayo de la ciudad dijo acerca de ellos.
1783.
Unos cuantos días después de que las últimas tropas británicas
dejaron nuestro suelo, y el padre de nuestro país, el
general George Washington, él reunió a sus
oficiales en una taberna en la ciudad de
Nueva York para despedirse de
ellos. Estos hombres endurecidos
habían luchado por años contra el poder
militar más grande del mundo en aquel tiempo.
Contra toda esperanza, ellos ganaron libertad: libertad
para ellos mismos, y libertad para cada americano desde entonces.
Y parado frente a ellos, Washington se abrumó de emoción, ya que sabía los sacrificios que habían hecho.
Él dijo:
Con un corazón lleno de amor
y gratitud, me despido de ustedes
ahora. Es mi ferviente deseo que sus
últimos días sean tan prósperos y
alegres como los primeros
han sido gloriosos y
honorables.
Ese fue el deseo para nuestros primeros veteranos y debería ser el nuestro para cada veterano que les ha seguido. Pero tenemos que preguntar si lo hemos honrado.
Desde entonces y hasta ahora, ha habido una larga lista de veteranos heroicos que han conectado nuestra historia, desde George Washington hasta, digamos, Chris Kyle. Millones como ellos.. Millones de americanos comunes, equipados para cosas extraordinarias, y se han presentado para servir, y para salvarle las vidas de americanos. ¿Cuántos han hecho más que esta generación en uniforme?
La guerra contra el terror es el compromiso militar más largo en la historia de los Estados Unidos. Muchos han servido en Irak y Afganistán. Decenas de miles de heridos. Más de 6,800 muertos. El peso sobre los militares y sus familias es enorme. Durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial, el despliegue averaje en el teatro de operaciones era de seis meses. En la Guerra de Corea: nueve meses. Vietnam: trece meses. Para Irak y Afganistán, una primera misión era 45 meses. Los costes de estos despliegues han sido enormes, y no divulgados.
Mientras más tiempo están desplegados y luego re-desplegados, más son las probabilidades que ellos padecerán de PTSD, y acerca de medio millón de nuestros veteranos que regresan sufren de él en alguna forma. Sufren también de un número desproporcionado de desempleo. La tasa media de divorcio es de alrededor del 80%. Y peor todavía, amigos, la tasa de suicidio entre nuestros mejores y más brillantes es de 23 al día.
Mientras estamos aquí reunidos, estamos a salvo, nos sentimos seguros. La estamos pasando bién.. cuatro días juntos en una conferencia. En estos cuatro días, 92 de nuestros veteranos se habrán quitado la vida.
Entonces, ¿hemos honrado el deseo de Washington para nuestros veteranos? Yo no pregunto esto como política, como Dakota estaba sugeriendo. No. Yo lo pregunto como tantas madres de veteranos de combate. Cuando mi hijo se fue a la guerra por primera vez era todavía adolescente. Yo enfrenté la misma realidad que las demás mamás tienen que enfrentar. Y es cuando uno se da cuenta que: Contra, no iba a poder estar ahí para ayudar, para proteger. Las mamás no pueden estar ahí cuando están lastimados. Puedo rezar. Y lo hice. Y lo hago..
Pero hay pocas cosas mas difíciles que darle un besito a un hijo antes de mandarlo al camino del peligro, sabiendo que no vas a estar ahí para proteger. Esos primeros despliegues.. Ah. Ese es el momento cuando un padre deja de llamarlo ‘hijo’ y comienza a decirle ‘señor’.
América entrega sus hijos y sus hijas al servicio con la promesa que serán cuidados. A nuestras tropas les prometen: Nadie será abandonado en el campo de batalla. Les prometen que una nación agradecida no medirá gastos para enmendarlos, y sanarlos cuando están heridos. Y ahora. Regresan a casa heridos. Demasiados de ellos con sus cuerpos y espíritus quebrantados. Bueno pues, nosotros sus madres sus padres, sus esposos y sus esposas estamos aquí para exigir el cumplimiento de lo que se les ha prometido.
Nosotros no podemos esperar para que D.C. arregle sus meteduras de pata burócratas. Esta burocracía está matando a nuestros veteranos. Ellos esperan meses y años para recibir tratamiento en el VA y están perdiendo esperanza. Los errores del VA y esos encubrimientos han costado la vida de 500 veteranos sólo en los últimos cuatro años, y eso no incluye los que tomaron su propria vida.
Hemos sido testigos de la manera en la cual el gobierno corrupto trata a nuestros veteranos: el VA poniéndolos en esas listas de espera secretas, y engañando al Congreso.. espiando a los investigadores simplemente porque quieren llegar al fondo de eso. Y no vayan a pensar que el problema esta resuelto sencillamente porque los medios ya no cubren los escándalos durante la sesión saliente.
El hecho que un tipo de arriba renunció, no significa que los problemas desaparecieron. El motivo por el cual no se oye hablar de ellos es porque nuestros veteranos no lloriquean. No les nace quejarse.Por eso esto ha estado bajo el radar por tanto tiempo.
Bueno, nuestra deuda de gratitud empieza el pago con tres soluciones sencillas que el gobierno puede y debería hacer ahora mismo, porque ya es hora de exigir soluciones.
Primero con el Cuidado de la Salud: Dar vales (‘vouchers’) para tratamiento fuera del VA (Departamento de Veteranos). Darle a nuestros veteranos la misma libertad que nos dieron a nosotros. Y en vez de premiar a extranjeros ilegales que se cuelan en la fila, recibiendo beneficios de EE.UU. que se les entrega.. ¡No, exigimos que los veteranos sean los primeros en la fila!
Segundo: permitirle a un veterano que está reintegrandose a la fuerza de trabajo civil, que utilise las técnicas que aprendió en el ejército. Hoy. Digamos, un veterano con capacidades excepcionales en la informática o con abilidades mecánicas, muchas veces tienen que ir hacia atrás, y volver a tomar cursos para poner un título o un papelito en la pared que dice que están certificados en un área que ya conocían. ¡Que se examinen y transfieran su certificación del ejército! Sentido comun.. ¡Sentido comun! (Yo sé que es una especie en peligro de extinción por aquí..)
Tercero: asegurar sus beneficios. En el Congreso aseguraron sus beneficios. Sabían ustedes que el año pasado votaron para reducirle los beneficios de jubilación de los veteranos por 20%? Votaron ellos para reducir los suyos? No. Ellos solamente corrijen su rumbo cuando un número suficiente de nosotros se alza para protestar. ¿Votaron ellos para reducir los suyos? No. Ellos solamente corrijen su rumbo cuando un número suficiente de nosotros se alza para protestar. Entonces, quítenle el asunto a los políticos, después de pasar legislación que asegura beneficios permanentemente.
Ahora bien. El Cuidado de la Salud y los Beneficios.. esto es sólo parte de la equación. El deseo del general Washington para nuestros veteranos que sus acciones en la guerra fueran reconocidas como gloriosas y honorables. Y las han sido, no cabe duda.
Pero la cosa que esos veteranos de la guerra revolucionaria tuvieron las tropas de hoy no tienen es victoria. Y esa es la cosa que más aprecian. Ellos merecen saber que sus sacrificios no son en vano. ..saber que por lo que ellos lucharon y por lo que sus amigos murieron ¡valió la pena!
Dicen que los viejos declaran las guerras y luego mandan a los jóvenes a combatirlas. Entonces, es el deber del que los manda de estar seguro que podemos ganar esas guerras. Y es nuestro deber de elegir un comandante en jefe honorable que esté dispuesto a hacer los mismos sacrificios que manda a otros hacer.
Tenemos que proveerle a nuestras tropas la voluntad política para ganar, y las normas para entablar combate para ganar. Cuántos americanos han sido lastimados por las normas “políticamente correctas” para entablar combate, o por aquellos que están demasiados incomodos en darle a las tropas la confianza y herramientas que necesitan para ganar.
Eso nos lleva a una pregunta muy desagradable, y es una con la cual cada mamá estrella de oro y cada veterano vivirá para siempre. ¿Ganamos de verdad en Irak y Afganistán.. antes de ondear esa bandera blanca? Todavía no se sabe.
Pero cuando los malos terroristas islámicos están en marcha gritando “ala Akbar” desde Syria, hasta Irak, Libia, Yemen, y en las calles de Paris.. Bueno, no luce como victoria. El Medio Oriente es una caja de fósforos y se está cayendo a pedazos. Es un parque de recreos para un culto de muerte. ISIS se expande. Recupera terreno que acabamos de derramar sangre para asegurar. Un califato se extiende desde Baghdad hasta Damascus, hasta Jerusalén.
Sólo en Egipto, el Jihad está en retiro, y eso no es gracias a la administración de Obama. Recuerden, ellos apoyaron a la Hermandad Musulmana, que el pueblo al fin derrocó en uno de los levantamientos más grandes en la historia.
En el 2009 cuando Obama tomó cargo de la Guerra Contra el Terror, los Islámicos estaban en retiro, y Al Qaeda era una fuerza derrotada. Ahora controlan más territorios que nunca. Es donde entrenan y lanzan mas ataques contra nosotros y nuestros aliados. Y eso era predicible.
Los mandos militares nos avisaron: No se retiren de Irak sin una fuerza residual para mantener control sobre aquello y para retener el terreno que los buenos habian acabado de ganar. Amigos, la expansión de ISIS es el resultado directo de la denegación de este presidente de hacerle caso a ese aviso.
Y ahora donde quiera que miren los Islámicos están en marcha. Desde Boko Harem tomando niñas y vendiendolas como esclavas, a ISIS crucificando a cristianos y quemando a inocentes vivos en jaulas, y descabezando niños y bebitos.
Aparte de Dios Todopoderoso, ¿cuál es la única fuerza lo suficientemente potente que mantendrá esta marea barbárica alejada? Lo único que nos separa a nosotros de esos salvajes es El Rojo, Blanco y Azúl ¡Son los Militares de los Estados Unidos!
Estamos en una lucha a largo plazo entre civilizaciones contra las fuerzas del mal. Y más vale que tomemos en serio la victoria. Las consecuencias de debilidad: retiro y derrota. En el pasado nuestros líderes enfrentaron el mal con claridad moral. Eliminanaron el fascismo y los Nazis. Ellos echaron el comunismo al cesto de basura de la historia.
Que no quepa duda, el islamismo radical es tan peligroso como esas ideologías. Y los Islamistas ahora juran que van a traer la lucha a nuestras costas. ISIS amenaza de subir su bandera negra sobre la Casa Blanca. Le dijeron al presidente Obama: Le cortaremos su cabeza en la Casa Blanca. Pero nuestro presidente que dirige por detrás piensa que podemos co-exisitir con estos matones genocidas. Él piensa que el Estado Islámico no es realmente islámico. Pretendiendo que no está ahí no lo hace desaparecer.
Llamándolo otra cosa no asegura que sea así. Y dándole sermones a cristianos de bajerse de sus pedestales sobre el radicalismo islámico no detendrá a los islámicos de matar a cristianos.
Deje de echarle la culpa a la víctima y ¡despierte, Señor Presidente! Mientras los cristianos bajamos nuestras cabezas rezando por usted, los islámicos quieren cortar su cabeza.
El mundo que ellos quieren es un mundo que se someta. No nos someteremos jamás al mal! Nosotros echaremos el radicalismo islámico a las cenizas de la historia, igual que a los Nazis antes de ellos. Ay, el ingenuo departamento de estado de Obama.. ellos dicen que no podemos salir a matar para ganar la guerra. ¿De verdad? Díganle eso a los Nazis. Ah. Esperen. No pueden porque están muertos. Los matamos.
La historia prueba que la destrucción del aparato militar de un enemigo – eso da victoria. Y de la victoria a la paz. Entonces no vamos a tolerar a políticos que desperdician las vidas preciosas de nuestros hijos e hijas en el campo de batalla, y luego, cuando vuelven a casa, los políticos se niegan cruelmente a respetar lo que le debemos.
Nuestros veteranos merecen mejor que eso, y lo exigimos. Porque amigos, si buscan las virtudes que distinguen a esta nación a la del enemigo, las encontrarán en los que están en uniforme que prometen pagar el precio por nuestra libertad.
Los Jihadis luchan porque tienen odio. Le tienen odio a los cristianos, a los judios, a las mujeres, a la diversidad y a la libertad. Nuestras tropas luchan por amor: el amor por la familia, la patria, y por la libertad.
Y si ustedes aman la libertad, ¡denle las gracias a un veterano! Yo les pido a aquellos que estan aquí hoy, cualquier veterano o miembro activo en servicio, honrennos, por favor, con ponerse de pie. Le queremos dar las gracias. Los saludamos. Les pedimos que se paren. ¡Nosotros los queremos! ¡Gracias!
Nosotros los amamos. Miren. Llamada a la acción. Acción conservadora. Esta es nuestra llamada la acción. Y no sólo aquí, pero donde quiera y todos los días. Encuentren a un veterano. Háblenles. Honrenlos. Denles las gracias y díganles que ustedes saben a quién darle las gracias por ella.
Entonces, nosotros honraremos el deseo de George Washington, dicho con un corazón lleno de amor y gratitud para lograr victoria honorable y gloriosa en el campo de batalla, y para ayudar a nuestros luchadores por la libertad tener días civiles tan prósperos y alegres como su servicio fue valiente y sincero.
Entonces, con una voz digamos, ¡dque Dios bendiga los militares de los Estados Unidos! Les damos las gracias, veteranos y ¡que Dios bendiga los Estados Unidos de America! ..
Muchisimas gracias, y por supuesto, estoy contenta de tomar algunas preguntas que ustedes tengan para mi que el tiempo permita de contestar.
Moderador: Buenas noches. Bueno, Gobernadora, tenemos tiempo para hacer unas cuantas breves preguntas en una ronda relámpago. Cada respuesta será con una sola palabra.
Moderador: Barack Obama.
GSP: Lo siento.
Moderador: Hillary Clinton.
GSP: Lo siento.
Moderador: Margaret Thatcher.
GSP: ¡Hierro!
Moderador: Y Gobernadora, tenemos muchos jóvenes aquí en el publico hoy. Gobernadora Palin, ¿cuáles son los asuntos mas importantes que deberían de estar presentes en sus mentes, ya que serán los líderes de la próxima generación?
GSP: Bueno, ojalá a través del ósmosis parte del mensaje que yo envié hoy, pero yo sé que los que están en este salon entiendien lo que está pasando. Ellos tienen ese gran amor y honor para aquellos que darían todo en términos de servicio y en nombre de la libertad para nosotros.
Estos chicos tienen que entender como dijo Thomas Paine: Si hay problemas, que sea en mi día, para que mi hijo entonces tenga paz. Eso significa que tenemos que sacrificios hoy y no ser tan sumamente egoistas, los políticos en particular, que le dan a estos chicos, a sus hijos, y a sus hijos después, una deuda que los encadena y los restringe. Yo creo que lo que estamos haciendo hoy es immoral e injusto, y en mi opinión, esa deuda es ilegal.
Moderador: Una ultima pregunta. Cree Usted que la prensa trata diferentemente a una mujer política republicana a una mujer política democrata?
GSP: Sí.
Please share this article and the full Tribute-to-our-Veterans Video!
This is an important message that needs to be sent loud and clear: the Spanish Media is like the Lame Stream Media. Its bias is just not getting the attention it should. Language is not the barrier in programming we should worry about, agenda is. This video is captioned and narrated in Spanish and in English to get our conservative message out. Vote (or add to) your opinion in the poll below.
On October 5th, 2011, Sarah Palin announced she was not seeking the GOP nomination for president. Her last public speech was on September 3rd, 2011, before that announcement. In her speech, Sarah criticizes President Obama’s job plan. She contrasts her plan, which is based on reality to his which is based on fantasy, consisting of payoffs for his friends and supporters, increasing the debt and taking hard-earned money from citizens to give it to special interests. She shares her plan, a real working-man’s plan which offers solutions that work in the real world, resulting in jobs for Americans. Below is the introduction and excerpt of the Five Point Plan translated from the original SarahPac transcript.
Introducción: En octubre 5 del 2011, Sarah Palin anuncio que no iba a solicitar la nominación para presidente del partido republicano. El extracto más importante de su discurso del 3 de septiembre fue el plan de cinco puntos para restaurar América. Este fue su último discurso público antes de ese anuncio. En su discurso Sarah critica el plan de empleos del presidente Obama donde las soluciones están basadas en fantasía, consistiendo de recompensa para sus amigos y partididarios, aumentando la deuda y tomando el dinero trabajado por los ciudadanos, dándoselo a los intereses creados. Ella ofrece su plan, un plan que favorece verdaderamente al trabajador, con soluciones que funcionan en el mundo real, resultando en empleo para Americanos.
Gobernadora Palin: En un plazo de cinco dias nuestro presidente nos premierá con un discurso más. En su próximo discurso él va a revelar su último nuevo super gran-plan de empleos. Tendrá más objetivos “nobles” y retórica más florida, más fantasías económicas ilógicas, y más culpas echadas y acusaciones continuadas, pero escuchen bien lo que dice. Todas sus soluciones van a girar en torno a más de lo mismo: más recompensas para sus amistades y partidarios. Su plan es el mismo de siempre: crecer más al gobierno,aumentar más la deuda, tomar y darle más de su dinero bien ganado a los intereses creados. Y es un gran problema; pero Uds saben cuáles son los problemas causados por el “status quo” en Washington. Podríamos continuar el día entero … El “status quo” para mi significa en latín “más del mismo lío en el cuál estamos metidos”. Ese “status quo” ya no funcionará más. Podríamos hablar el día entero de los problemas porque los viven a diario. Entonces hablemos de verdaderas soluciones. Quiero decirles cuál es mi plan.
Mi Plan
Mi plan consiste del empoderamiento de nuestros estados, el empoderamiento de nuestros empresarios, y más importantemente el empoderamiento de ustedes – nuestros invididuos trabajadores – porque tengo fe en ustedes, les tengo confianza y los respeto. El camino adelante no puede continuar a ser la política de siempre. Tenemos que parar la expansión de un gobierno fuera de control y desconectado del pueblo.
Primero. Todo el poder no especificamente delegado al gobierno federal por la Constitución está reservado a los estados y a nosotros, el pueblo. Entonces, vamos a cumplir con la décima enmienda y pasarle los poderes al gobierno local donde los fundadores intentaron que estuvieran.
Segundo. ¿Qué pasó con todas esas promesas de quedar comprometidos a la derogación de la madre de todos los mandatos de gran gobierno no fundados? ¡Tenemos que revocar Obamacare! y mantener control estricto sobre las reglamentaciones onerosas que son una bota a nuestro cuello, echar a un lado el gobierno, y dejar que el sector privado respire y crezca. Esto le permitirá a los negocios la confianza necesaria para expandir y contratar a más personas.
Tercero. No más deuda excesiva. Tenemos que priorizar y reducir, cancelar fondos del estímulo no usados y tener ese momento sincero donde nosotros nos hacemos dueños de la deuda y del desafío que es la reforma de ayuda social. Miren. La realidad es que vamos a tener reforma de ayuda social. Es solamente una cuestión de cómo lo vamos a lograr. O lo hacemos nosotros, o los mercados de capitales del mundo la meterán hasta la garganta, y la unica opción será de reformar nuestros programas de ayuda social. El “status quo” ya no es una opción. La reforma de ayuda social es nuestro deber ahora. Tiene que hacerse de manera que honre nuestro compromiso a nuestros estimados ancianos hoy, mientras manteniendo fe con futuras generaciones.
Yo les voy a decir algo. Yo no creo que nada ma haya molestado mas que esta bobería desde la Casa Blanca que a lo mejor no le van mandar los cheques a nuestros seniors. El dinero es de ellos! Ellos han pagado su seguro social a través de su vida de trabajo, y para que el presidente diga, “Ah, a lo mejor no podemos hacerles sus cheques.” ¿Ah, bueno, y entonces donde se fué su dinero, políticos? Es como si el comandante en jefe estuviera dispuesto a embarcar a nuestro ejército, amenazándoles que sus cheques a lo mejor no van a llegar, pero los políticos seguirán recibiendo sus cheques y sus retiros asegurados, y el presidente seguirá recibiendo sus vacaciones extravagantes. ¿No están hartos ya de todas esas prioridades torcidas? Está todo al revés! A nuestros seniors, y a nuestros hombres y mujeres valientes en uniforme, los están usando como peones. Yo digo que es vergonzoso y basta ya. No más!
4. Cuarto. Ya es hora que América séa la super-potencia de energía. El estímulo verdadero que nosotros hemos estado anticipando es una producción de energía doméstica robusta y responsable. Tenemos los recursos. La energía segura y ecónomica es la clave a una economía próspera y tiene que ser nuestra fundación. Entonces, yo haria lo contrario de lo que esta haciendo Obama, manipulando las provisiones de energía de los Estados Unidos. Perforen aquí, perforen ahora . Que se construyan las refinerías y los oleoductos. No se dobleguen a los países extranjeros y a los dictadores, pidiéndoles que aumenten la producción y la industria para nosotros, prometiéndoles a ellos que seremos su mejor cliente.
No, no cuando tenemos los recursos aquí. Necesitamos aprovechar de nuestros recursos naturales dados por Dios. Yo les prometo que eso traer verdadero crecimiento de empleo, no esos trabajos verdes, falsos, de polvo de adas de los políticos, roceados con deseos y brillo.
No, una política de energía fuerte y comprehensiva que crece este lazo indestructible entre la energía hecha en America y nuestra prosperidad y seguridad. ¿Ustedes saben que hay suficientes projectos grandes, convencionales, de desarrollo de recursos naturales, esperando que el gobierno los apruebe, que podrían potencialmente crear mas de un millón de empleos altamente remunerados a través del país?
Esto es un verdadero estímulo. No le costaría al gobierno ni un real permitirle al sector privado hacerlos. En realidad, estos projectos generarán billones de dólares en ingreso. ¿Se pueden imaginar eso: un projecto de estímulo que nos saque de la deuda en vez de meternos más profundamente en ella? Y estos son los trabajos que pagan bien. Yo sé eso, por experiencia. Por años mi propia familia se mantuvo gracias a un buen trabajo que Todd tuvo en el sector de energía en el Norte de Alaska. La recuperación económica de América empieza con la recuperación de energía de América.
Quinto. Podemos y haremos de América el país más atractivo del mundo para hacer negocio. Y así es como lo vamos hacer. En este momento tenemos el tipo impositivo de impuesto corporativo federal más alto del mundo industrializado. Ustedes sabían que nuestras tasas impositivas son más altas que las de China y de Cuba comunista?
Esto no genera tanto ingreso como ustedes se imaginarían, porque muchas grandes corporaciones se dan el lujo de evitar impuestos federales porque tienen amigos en D.C. que corrigen las reglas para el resto de nosotros. Esto nos hace menos competitivo y restringe nuestro motor de prosperidad. Contra, hay negocios que pasan más tiempo tratando de calcular cómo esconder sus gananzias que tratando de generar más gananzias para que puedan expandir y emplear a más de nosotros.
Entonces, para hacer de América el lugar mas atractivo y más competitivo para hacer negocio, para instalarse, y para emplear a personas aquí, para atraer el capital de todo el mundo que resultará en una explosión de crecimiento, en vez de caerle atrás a la industria en el exterior, yo propongo eliminar la taza impositiva de ingreso corporativo federal. Y oiganme bien en esto, así es como nosotros vamos a crear millones de empleos altamente remunerados. Así es como aumentamos la oportunidad y la prosperidad para todos.
Pero aquí esta la mejor parte: para equilibrar cualquier perdida de ingreso federal de esta reducción de impuesto, nosotros eliminamos el bienestar corporativo y todas las lagunas, y eliminamos los recates financieros. Así es como le rompenos la espalda al capitalismo amiguista porque se alimenta del bienestar corporativo que viene siendo socialismo para los muy ricos.
Todo eso lo podemos cambiar. El mensaje entonces a la corporaciones que crean empleos es: Nosotros los desencadenamos del tipo impositivo de ingreso corporativo federal más grande del mundo pero ustedes tendrán que mantenerse de pied o caer como el resto de nosotros. Miren. Cuando nosotros empoderamos a los creadores de empleo la economía se elevará y los Americanos regresarán a trabajar.
Este plan es un primer paso en una larga marcha hacia la restauración fundamental de una economía fuerte y de libre mercado. Y representa el tipo de reforma que necesitamos. Y amigos, tiene que venir de ustedes. Tiene que venir del pueblo americano. La verdadera esperanza está en ustedes.
Conclusión: Este plan es un primer paso en una larga marcha hacia la restaración fundamental de un mercado económico y libre. Y representa el tipo de reforma que necesitamos. Y amigos, tiene que venir de ustedes. Tiene que venir del pueblo americano. La verdadera esperanza está en ustedes. No es la “esperancita y cambio” que tanto oímos mencionar en el 2008. Esa lección la hemos aprendido todo. La verdadera esperanza no está en un solo individuo ni en un político ciertamente. Esa esperancita y cambio que le inculcaron al individuo cuando Barack Obama fue candidato.. Ella no creó un solo empleo en agosto. ¿No es cierto? Es la primera vez que esto ha ocurrido en los Estados Unidos desde la segunda guerra mundial. La verdadera esperanza viene de ustedes. Y ella viene de la realización que no hace falta un título para hacer una diferencia. Podemos volver a poner a este país en el camino correcto. Podemos lograrlo a través del empoderamiento del pueblo, dándonos cuenta que Dios ha bendecido con abundancia y riqueza natural a esta nación realmente excepcional, y luego hacemos algo al respeto de esa realización.
In five days time, our President will gift us with yet another speech. In his next speech he’ll reveal his latest new super-duper “jobs plan.” It will have more lofty goals and flowery rhetoric, more illogical economic fantasies and more continued blame and finger-pointing. But listen closely to what he says. All of his “solutions” will revolve around more of the same – more payoffs for his friends and supporters. His “plan” is the same as it’s always been, and that’s grow more government, increase more debt, take and give more of your hard-earned money to special interests. And this is such a problem. But you know what the problems are. We could go on all day about the problems caused by the status quo in Washington. Status quo I think is Latin for “more of the same mess that we’re in.” That status quo won’t work any more. We could go on all day about the problems, but you know them because you live them everyday. So, let’s talk about real solutions. I want to tell you what my plan is. My plan is a bona-fide pro-working man’s plan, and it deals in reality. It deals in the way that the world really works because we must talk about what really works in order to get America back to work.
My plan is about empowerment: empowerment of our states, empowerment of our entrepreneurs, most importantly empowerment of you – our hardworking individuals – because I have faith, I have trust, I have respect for you.
The way forward is no more politics as usual. We must stop expanding an out-of-control and out-of-touch federal government.
This is first: All power not specifically delegated to the federal government by our Constitution is reserved for the states and for we the people. So, let’s enforce the 10th Amendment and devolve powers back locally where the Founders intended them to be.
Second, what happened to all those promises about staying committed to repealing the mother of all big government unfunded mandates? We must repeal Obamacare! And rein in burdensome regulations that are a boot on our neck. Get government out of the way. Let the private sector breathe and grow. This will allow the confidence that businesses need in order to expand and hire more people.
Third, no more run away debt. We must prioritize and cut. Cancel unused stimulus funds, and have that come to Jesus moment where we own up to the debt challenge that is entitlement reform. See, the reality is we will have entitlement reform; it’s just a matter of how we’re going to get there. We either do it ourselves or the world’s capital markets are going to shove it down our throats, and we’ll have no choice but to reform our entitlement programs. The status quo is no longer an option. Entitlement reform is our duty now, and it must be done in a way that honors our commitment to our esteemed elders today, while keeping faith with future generations. I don’t think anything has irked me more than this nonsense coming from the White House about maybe not sending our seniors their checks. It’s their money! They have paid into Social Security all of their working lives; and for the President to say, “ah, we may not be able to cut their checks,” ah, well, where did all their money go, politicians? It’s like the Commander-in-Chief being willing to throw our military under the bus by threatening that their paychecks may not arrive. But the politicians will still get their checks and their secure retirements, and he’ll still get his posh vacations. Aren’t you just sick to death of those skewed priorities? It’s all backwards. Our seniors and our brave men and women in uniform being used as pawns – I say it’s shameful, and enough is enough. No more.
Fourth, it is time for America to become the energy superpower. The real stimulus that we’ve been waiting for is robust and responsible domestic energy production. We have the resources. Affordable and secure energy is the key to any thriving economy, and it must be our foundation. So, I would do the opposite of Obama’s manipulation of U.S. supplies of energy. Drill here, drill now. Let the refineries and the pipelines be built. Stop kowtowing to foreign countries and dictators asking them to ramp up production and industry for us, promising them that we’ll be their greatest customer. No, not when we have the resources here. We need to move on tapping our own God-given natural resources. I promise you that this will bring real job growth, not the politicians’ phony “green jobs” fairy dust sprinkled with wishes and glitter… No, a hardcore all-of-the-above energy policy that builds this indestructible link between made-in-America energy and our prosperity and our security. You know, there are enough large conventional natural resource development projects waiting for government approval that could potentially create more than a million high-paying jobs all across the country. And this is true stimulus. It wouldn’t cost government a dime to allow the private sector to do these. In fact, these projects will generate billions of dollars in revenue. Can you imagine that: a stimulus project that actually helps dig us out of debt instead of digging us further into it! And these are good-paying jobs, and I know that from experience. For years my own family was supported (as Todd worked up on the North Slope) by a good energy sector job. America’s economic revival starts with America’s energy revival.
Fifth, we can and we will make America the most attractive country on earth to do business in. Here’s how we’re going to do this. Right now, we have the highest federal corporate income tax rate in the industrialized world. Did you know our rates are higher than China and communist Cuba? This doesn’t generate as much revenue as you would think, though, because many big corporations skirt federal taxes because they have the friends in D.C. who right the rules for the rest of us. This makes us less competitive and restrains our engine of prosperity. Heck, some businesses spend more time trying to figure out how to hide their profits than they do in generating more profits so that they can expand and hire more of us. So, to make America the most attractive and competitive place to do business, to set up shop here and hire people here, to attract capital from all over the globe that will lead to an explosion of growth, instead of chasing industry offshore, I propose to eliminate all federal corporate income tax. And hear me out on this. This is how we create millions of high-paying jobs. This is how we increase opportunity and prosperity for all.
But here’s the best part: To balance out any loss of federal revenue from this tax cut, we eliminate corporate welfare and all the loopholes and we eliminate bailouts. This is how we break the back of crony capitalism because it feeds off corporate welfare, which is just socialism for the very rich. We can change all of that. The message then to job-creating corporations is: We’ll unshackle you from the world’s highest federal corporate income tax rate, but you will stand or fall on your own, just like all the rest of us out on main street.
See, when we empower the job-creators, our economy will soar; Americans will get back to work.
This plan is a first step in a long march towards fundamental restoration of a strong and free market economy. And it represents the kind of real reform that we need. And, folks, it must come from you. It must come from the American people. Real hope is in you. It’s not that hopey-changey “stuff” that we heard about back in 2008. We’ve all learned that. And real hope isn’t in an individual. It’s not in a politician certainly. And that hopey-changey stuff that was put in an individual back when Barack Obama was a candidate – that hopey-changey stuff didn’t create one job in August, did it? That’s the first time that’s happened in the United States since World War II. Real hope comes from you. Real hope comes from realizing that we the people can make the difference. And you don’t need a title to make a difference. We can get this country back on the right track. We can do it by empowering the people and realizing that God has richly blessed this most exceptional nation, and then we do something about that realization.
We already have La Raza praising 11 House Republicans for their efforts, and Rep. Gutierrez making appearances with them. Although his comments reflect reality accurately, the title of this article should be: Ramos Resents Republican Presidential Hopefuls Rubio, Cruz who happen to be from Cuban Descent.
Breitbartreported: Speaking at Harvard’s Institute of Politics on Tuesday evening, Ramos said that “for the first time in history, there are two Hispanic candidates running for president.” “Regardless of the criticism Republicans receive from the mainstream press, “Republicans have been doing something right that they have two Hispanic candidates. And the Democrats don’t have a single Hispanic candidate for this election”.
He mentioned that if Cruz or Rubio is on the top of the 2016 ticket, it will be very interesting to see if Hispanic Democrats vote for a Latino candidate. Ramos noted that “the majority of Latinos vote for Democrats” and the “majority of Latinos are of Mexican origin” while Rubio and Cruz are both of Cuban descent. He said Latino voters will be faced with the question about whether they should vote for a Latino candidate just because he is Hispanic.
Ramos is correct: the mainstream press is against Republicans; that includes, of course, his own. Let’s get out of the way the difference between the terms Hispanic and Latino for clarity’s sake, since they are used interchangeably often. Hispanics are from Spain or any of the Spanish speaking countries in Latin America. “Latino” is used as an abbreviated form of “Latino-Americano” (Latin-American), or someone coming from Latin America. Some statistics, too:
Hispanics are the second fastest-growing ethnic group in the United States after Asian Americans. Since 1970, the Latino [should be Hispanic not Latino to avoid confusion] population has increased sixfold, from 9.6 million to 53 million as of 1/1/2012. Its is projected that its share of the U.S. population currently at 17% is expected to reach 29% or to 119 million by 2060, according to the latest projections from the U.S. Census Bureau (2014). This figure includes 38 million Hispanophone Americans, making the US home to the largest community of Spanish speakers outside of Mexico, surpassing Argentina, Colombia, and Spain within the last decade.
Now we get to the point (al punto) of this article: shifting the focus away from what we know about Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, to what we should know -if we didn’t already- about Ramos and Univision, since he brought all of this up:
1. JorgeRamos is the evening news anchor of Noticiero Univision. He was born in Mexico City 57 years ago. He first came to the United States on a one-year certificate program at UCLA Extension and has enjoyed a long career with Univision where he got a job with a work permit in an L.A. affiliate 30 years ago.
“My English was—I couldn’t even understand myself.”
Ramos hosts “Al Punto” a successful political Sunday talk show on Univision. He is part of digital magazine “Fusion” which targets a younger more liberal audience, covering topics he admits could never be aired on Univision. Ramos is very good at what he does; but his influence does not speak for all Hispanics.
“I went on Jon Stewart the other day and I told him,
Ramos constantly refers to himself as an immigrant. Maybe he does it for symbolic reasons. I was curious, so I did a little research and found this:
“Al Punto“debuted on Univision on September 9, 2007, the same day as the first Spanish language U.S. Presidential Debate hosted by Univision.
From the transcript: UNIVISION NETWORK DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE PARTICIPANTS: SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY); SENATOR CHRISTOPHER DODD (D-CT); FORMER SENATOR JOHN EDWARDS (DSC); FORMER SENATOR MIKE GRAVEL (D-AK); REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS KUCINICH (D-OH); SENATOR BARACK OBAMA (D-IL); AND GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON (D-NM)
MODERATORS: JORGE RAMOS AND MARIA ELENA SALINAS, UNIVISION NETWORK ANCHORS LOCATION: UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI, MIAMI, FLORIDA TIME: 7:04 PM EDT DATE: SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 9 2007
Three months later on December 9th, 2007, Univision hosted another forum where anchors, Jorge Ramos and Maria Elena Salinas, moderated the first U.S. Republican presidential debate in Spanish. Destino 2008was held againg at the University of Miami, in Coral Gables, Florida. In February of 2008, Jorge Ramos asked questions to U.S. presidential candidates at the CNN Democratic debateat the University of Texas at Austin, in Austin, Texas:
CNN, Univision and the Texas Democratic Party jointly hosted a debate between Obama and Clinton on February 21 at 7:00 CST on the campus of the University of Texas at Austin. The debate was rebroadcast at 10:30 in Spanish. Questions focused heavily on illegal immigration and the economy, among other issues.
Excerpt: Brian Lamb: Why did you become an American citizen and what year did you do it?
Jorge Ramos: I did it in 2008. For me it was very important to participate fully in this country. It’s truly a wonderful country and my fight is that this country would treat other immigrants like me the same way they treated the millions of immigrants who came after me. It’s truly amazing, who could have thought that when John F. Kennedy was writing his book “A Nation of Immigrants,” it was 1958, I was born exactly that year and with those wonderful ideas and of course he was killed in ’63, but in ’65 with the immigration act of 1965 everything changed and because of that, because John F. Kennedy and because of “A Nation of Immigrants” I’m in this country, so I wanted to participate fully. I was very concerned about the war, I was concerned about my kids. Paola who’s 23 right now and Nicolas who’s 12, they were born here in this country and I wanted to – I wanted to be fully part of the United States. This has been a wonderful, generous, and magnificent country for me and I wanted to be part of it.
It is not clear whether he became a citizen before or after he was allowed to ask questions of the U.S. presidential candidates at the CNN debate in February, 2008, as the views expressed above differ from his views in 2004where he mentions he is not a U.S. citizen, despite his long years here, “in case I wanttoreturn to Mexico to run for office.” [ The interview on CSPAN is long but worth a listen)
That means he was not a citizen in 2007 which raises a lot of questions. Is he sincere or just a hypocrite? It sure seems arrogant to point the finger at U.S. citizens who want their laws enforced, when he may have become a citizen for expediency. [And he has chutzpah to moderate debates if he’s not one!]
RECOGNITION AND AWARDS
Ramos has received the Maria Moors Cabot award from the University of Columbia, he won 8 Emmy awards for excellence in journalism (including the first ever presented by the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences to honor leaders of Spanish Language Television). In 2002 he was honoredwith the ‘Ruben Salazar’ award by the National Council of La Raza for his positive portrayal of Latinos. In 2008 The Commonwealth Club of California recognized him with the Distinguished Citizen Award for being one of the outstanding individuals who embody the American Dream as an immigrant to the United States. Biography
He has said he can do what ever he damn well pleases (“lo que se me pegue la gana”) on his network, Univision. He’s like a pied piper for La Raza, and lord of a land within the land of plenty (ours) whose authority he defies and wants toppled. For that he is rewarded worldwide. Surprise. When questioning others he is sarcastic about the intentions of the undocumented’s: Do you (really) think we want to make the United States an extension of Mexico or claim it as part of our territory? That is Senor Ramos: America’s News Anchor. He’s not just a journalist. He takes his activism seriously. What’s not love if you’re a racist lib?
[That picture reminds me of Putin’s pictures on a horse.] In her commentary for TIME where he made the cover of 2015’s 100 Most Influential People, she writes:
Ramos wrangles with President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner; he swims the Rio Grande; he says he asks every question as if it’s his last, determined to get an answer or go down trying. What happened to immigration reform? He knows he has a voice and is not afraid to use it. He shouts from every rooftop that Hispanic rights are human rights.
After decades on the cutting edge of the news agenda, Jorge Ramos, who grew up in Mexico, is waging the campaign of a lifetime, which is also a defining issue for America, the country he calls home.
If you haven’t gotten sick yet (I am), there’s more. Yes Ramos is cocky and full of himself, but I would be dishonest intellectually to deny or not admire the passion he has for what he does. In his speech to an audience of leaders he calls rebels [I actually like that term], he toasts the Dreamers, which he calls his real heroes.
“Because Congress has done nothing for a decade, I salute them for taking matters into their own hands and changing American immigration policy.”
The most influential leader of 2015 warns: You do not want to be their enemy, because they will get in your face. They are really American citizens, but don’t have a paper to prove it. He makes a reminder and gives a stern word of caution to politicians and presidential candidates who are thinking of deporting anyone:
“Latinos will decide the next election and not vote for any candidate who wants to deport their father, their mother, your friends or your neighbors.”
When I say I like the word rebel, I mean it in a good way (for our cause). And when I say I “admire” his passion, I am really expressing it in the same spirit he pointed out that the Republican Party is doing something right because two Hispanics are running for president. What I really wish is for his ego and immigration views to blast him into oblivion. Maybe in the end he will be seen for what he is: an elitist out for his career like the rest of them! Ramos says he hopes to grow his clout beyond the Latino community with “Fusion“:
“What I really like is that for the first time, I don’t need translation,” he says. “And without translation, there’s an immediate impact. And definitely the language of power is English.” [How romantic sarc>].
2. Univision is the largest network aimed at Hispanics in the U.S. It has one of the largest audience of Spanish-language television viewers in the world, according to Nielsen Media Research. NBC’s Telemundo is second. Both have studios, operate and produce in Miami but headquarters are in New York. In recent years, the network has reached viewership parity with the U.S.’s five major English language television networks; it often places a strong fifth, outranking The CW, with some fourth-place weekly placings; as of 2012, even first place rankings for individual programs over all five English networks, attributed to telenovelas. Who knew? So I did a little search on Sunday talk shows and found that although ratings vary weekly ‘Al Punto’ came in 4th or 5th overall and was mentioned even when its ratings were unavailable. I also looked for ratings comparing all five networks for evening news (cable/non cable, English/Spanish) but only found each one promoting its best week or month.
No. 1 broadcast evening news program with twice as many viewers as the combined audience of “ABC World News Tonight,” “CBS Evening News” and “NBC Nightly News” among Adults 18-34 (195,000 vs. 86,000), Adults 18-49 (433,000 vs. 202,000) and Adults 25-54 (416,000 vs. 246,000). SOURCE Among Bilingual Hispanic Viewers: “Noticiero Univision” delivered 55% more Viewers 2+ than the combined audience of ABC, CBS and NBC’s evening newscasts (930,000 vs. 601,000). Source: The Nielsen Company.
In Primetime for January 2012, FNC averaged 1,942,000 viewers, an increase of 78% since January 2002 when the network averaged 1,091,000. In fact, the Primetime ratings FNC achieved in 2002 after becoming number one eclipse what CNN and MSNBC are currently averaging today in 2012 (841,000 and 801,000 viewers respectively). Additionally, FNC’s current 2012-to-date Primetime average beat CNN and MSNBC combined. Fox News’s median age is 65+ but no figures reflect that age group. Viewers 25-54 have fallen but overall prime time audience went up to 2.02 in 2012 from 1.89 million in 2009. The O’Reilly Factor was the top show for Fox (and cable news as a whole), averaging 2.361M total viewers and 365K in the demo at 8 p.m. The Kelly File, which has been beating Bill O’Reilly’s show in the 9 p.m. slot on occasion, came in second overall, averaging 1.998M total viewers and 332K total. Read more here or here.
SUNDAY TALK SHOWS
In February 2012, Univision, its Sunday morning public affairs program:
“Al Punto” delivered two times more Adults 18-49 (186,000 vs. 91,000) than the combined audience of the English-language broadcast programs (ABC’s “This Week,” CBS’“Face The Nation,” NBC “Meet The Press” and “FOX News Sunday.”)
Rick Kissell Senior Editor of “Fox News Sunday” reported its telecast on July 28, 2014 in the DC market:
“Fox News Sundays” finished well ahead of NBC’s “Meet the Press” on WRC-4 (73,000), ABC’s “This Week” on WJLA-7 (65,000), CBS’ “Face the Nation” on WUSA-9 (59,000) and Univision’s “Al Punto” on WFDC-14 (57,000). It also led in households (64,000 to 53,000 for “Meet the Press”). In key news demo of adults 25-54, it led in D.C. with 41,000, followed by “This Week” (36,000), “Meet the Press” (33,000), “Al Punto” (32,000) and “Face the Nation” (29,000).
Nick Massella reported NBC’s Ratings in the DC Market in October , 2014 as follows:
“Meet” secured 65,000 total viewers followed by “FOX News Sunday” with 40,000 in the DC market. In terms of households, NBC also led with 55,000 followed by FOX with 34,000. In the A25-54 demo, FOX took first with 12,000 viewers followed by NBC with 9,000, CBS’s “Face the Nation” with 4,000, and ABC’s “This Week” considered a scratch. * FishbowlDC did not have access to ratings for Univision’s “Al Punto.”
“Face the Nation,” hosted by Bob Schieffer, the grandfatherly 77-year-old newsman, not only attracts the largest overall audience (a weekly average of 3.35 million during the first three months of 2014, 5 percent more than “This Week,” 8 percent more than “MTP” and 61 percent more than “Fox News Sunday”) but the largest audience among the coveted 25-to-54 set, too.
Collectively, about 9.6 million people watched the three networks each week during the first three months of this year, about the same number that watched Russert in 2005. This doesn’t count the audience for innumerable Sunday-morning competitors, from Fox News Sunday (hosted by former “Meet the Press” moderator Chris Wallace) to “Al Punto” on Univision. (2015 cable news ratings here)
EXACTLY.
Many politicians come to kiss Ramos’s hand (I had to steal that) on “Al Punto”. It is embarrassing to witness, which is why I translated this visit where Rep. Diaz-Balart is justifying our party’s actions to Ramos, revealing John Boehner’s intentions on amnesty. It is cordial but contentious as always (it gets old but he is tireless). He grills the Republican, slaps him around, throws in a racist accusation or two and dangles the 11 million-potential-voter-carrot they can’t ignore. Gutierrez, of course, does not get the same treatment. The clip is a gem, proving the GOPe does not want to answer to us. If Republicans want to really prove how compassionate they are, they would take a hard look at and explain how they can justify amnesty when our families and children will be hurt by it. Ramos said this about the next election and Republicans:
1) It is now accepted fact that Hispanic voters were integral to delivering Barack Obama’s presidency, and the road to D.C. has been permanently rerouted.
2) An immigration bill—which Ramos called “a prerequisite” for Latinos to even consider voting Republican—passed the Democratic Senate, but there is close to no hope in the Republican-controlled House, at least at present. “They don’t get it,” he says. Ramos’s theory is that the Republican nominee in 2016 will simply say of the do-nothing Congress, “They were wrong,” and then offer an immigration proposal of his own. May 5, 2014 New York Magazine.
What do we call it.. a threat? blackmail? ultimatum? shakedown or all of the above? There are so many appearances to choose from, but in every interview, Ramos must come across as the one who cares more than our side which is less passionate and caring about the plight of illegals. If you disagree with any of the points he makes, you have to defend not being anti-immigrant or anti-Hispanic. Marco Rubio’s views are far from being anti-immigrant. (We hate them!) He has made it clear that immigration reform is inevitable, that he is against deportations and will not disrupt DACA (only legislation that is okay before securing the border according to Conant his adviser) but that’s not enough for the true extremists. Cruz is for a bipartisan solution to Immigration reform, which leaves me feeling a little queasy. Does he mean DC-type bipartisanship or a unanimous decision and consensus where D’s and R’s are representing the American people. In any case it is all futile effort because Ramos doesn’t care about them, the law or the fact that the GOPe is shortchanging us on immigration. He does extract their true colors, though, in the process.
Dear Jorge (hor-hey),
Rubio is for Amnesty, DACA and Dreamers!
We hate that as much as you resent it. Why don’t you support him?
Bilingual and legal
Ingraham knows why they flock to Ramos: to try to make inroads into the Hispanic vote, but asks what the difference between him and Graham is. [Why don’t you ask Jorge, Laura?!]
We have two Hispanics running for president because they ran on a strong message which generated grassroots excitement, and which translated into votes. One lied about it, the other a little more trustworthy but it remains to be seen. Satisfaction or dissatisfaction with these presidential hopefuls should have nothing to do with their ethnicity, but character. The truth is, Ramos wishes the hero of this episode in history was a Hispanic Democrat, not a Hispanic Republican, and a Mexican, not a Cuban-American. At the end of this clip he pleads with Bill Richardson to run in 2016. Below is an example of this bias. It is short, in Spanish with English subtitles:
GOTCHA!
Ramos reminds Rubio above that millions of “Hispanics” want change (referring to millions of Mexican illegals, of course). Like all advocates for amnesty, (see Linda Vega) ‘undocumented’ is key. Rubio’s reply reflects what many in the community I live in believe: that immigration is a touchy, sensitive matter, a humanitarian, not political issue. (The same is probably true in other states where you don’t want to offend people you already know.) No matter what he says, though, he will be the bad guy. Univision will never cover Benghazi, Obama’s scandals or news that is not relevant to “Hispanics” (one particular sector..) Its bias (subtle or not) affects millions of bilinguals (55% prefer Noticiero Unvision to our new show), and what happens at home here and with neighbors is microcosmic of what happened before fair and balanced came around, or social media now. There are no competitors to challenge or enlighten viewers on other points of view. Certainly politicians can’t do so in just one sitting.
Rubio’s answer was cut off in the sub-titled clip, so I’m providing what was said in the full interview in Spanish to illustrate Ramos’s disdain for Rubio:
1 Family is not off the table. When Rubio was 16 his brother-in-law was sentenced to 25 years for drug trafficking (He was released in 2000 for good behavior). Rubio explains in his book American Son that it was a very difficult time for the family and scolds Ramos and Univision for making it the story front and center on the news when it had nothing to with him. It was just to smear Rubio. Ramos (playing dumb) insisted if he was going to run as VP in 2012 this information should be known. Rubio says they could have called him, not his sister, and that it was public record anyway; he called it a black eye for the network, but Ramos doesn’t stop there. He asks Rubio if he got money from his brother-in-law or was influenced in any way by him during his campaign. In no way, Rubio replied.
2 Ramos objects to ENGLISH as the official language of this country.If you speak it at home, he says, why should it be official? He says millions of voters could be affected by the police stopping or discriminating against anyone with an accent in Spanish. There are other negative consequences, he says, like being fired from jobs for speaking Spanish. It is discriminatory. Rubio: No one gets stopped for having an accent. In Florida English is the official language. It doesn’t stop you from speaking Spanish at home.
3 You’re Anti-Immigrant for not agreeing with me 100%. Ramos points to books on Rubio’s bookcase: He says Bush, Reagan, even McCain, a presidential candidate, were all for the legalization of illegals. Why aren’t you like them?Rubio: I am my own person and I base my views on what is happening in the country today. Ramos: People approach me saying he [Rubio] “does not defend us”. He says they want to see Rubio come out and defend them, the undocumented. Rubio: That’s not true. I defend.. Ramos: You could be president one day and change that. Rubio: Unfortunately, a lot of people make promises knowing they cannot keep. I say what I see can be done. Ramos: President Obama’s campaign manager told Univision it would be an insult to the Hispanic immigrant community if you [Republicans] had won the election in 2012 because your position is anti-Hispanic. Mitt Romney, for example, was for self-deportation. Rubio: Self-deportation means they made a decision to go back as a consequence of things getting difficult in Obama’s economy. I don’t know of anyone having positions that are ant-immigrant or anti-Hispanic. RAMOS: The perception is, you could be. RUBIO: Many on the left would say that. RAMOS: You could be powerful as the first Hispanic President of the U.S. or most powerful Hispanic, but your positions are 1) You are for the Arizona Law which persecutes immigrants, 2) you are against the Dream Act, and 3) you want English to be the official language. RUBIO: 1) The Arizona law is not meant for the entire nation but I support it because states have rights which I respect. 2) I do want to help the undocumented kids here and 3) English should be the official language like it is in Florida.
If you think I’m defending Rubio you’ve missed the point of this entire article.
Rubio has deserved all he got because of 2013. Like millions, I was angry he betrayed good Tea Party conservatives who voted for him thinking he was in their corner. He should have known better than to mess with immigration extremists, too. If there was any lesson to be learned, it is to speak clearly. I will never forget or condone his actions; however, SarahPac has urged us to support Cruz, Paul and Rubio from attacks from the left. She is right. And Ramos and Univision are part of those attacks.
RAMOS CALLS TED CRUZ AND HIS DAD DREAMERS
First, if Ramos had a one-year certificate to be in the United States because of Mexican censorship. His permit to work here must have had an expiration date. I don’t really care at this point if he overstayed a visa or not. Let’s assume he did every legally. It just makes me wonder why someone would be so adamantly AGAINST immigration law enforcement if he wasn’t illegal himself.
As a Cuban-American, I can say Ramos and those who lead “the” march to illegality resent our legality. He can’t help it. Ramos points out to Rubio that his grandfather and to Ted Cruz that his father were just like dreamers, simply asking for documentation. In Rubio’s case, it could not be compared because there was no law that existed that his grandfather was breaking in the first place. And Ted Cruz fends off the attack by explicitly saying his father was legal. Ramos ignores both explanations.
Even though he grilled Obama a while ago for not keeping his promise, Ramos says in this interview with pinhead OReilly: that Obama “evolved” on the legality of immigration action. Puleez. Obama said repeatedly he didn’t have the legal power to pass it, but Ramos and other activists are joyful that it was, and are emboldened by the move. They are trying not to sound ungrateful, but can’t hold back as this is just the start. They want all illegals here from every country amnestied, not just theirs. It will never end. By the way, Ramos says in English at the 3:33 (it’s such a bad habit!) that he is an immigrant.
I am being long-winded about this, but I am passionate about the subject. I recommend the tape below which illustrates what arguments we can use against amnesty. It is not by a politician but an anti-amnesty activist with no strings attached. He reminds me of Heather MacDonald: polite, smart and reasonable.In English:
So why should we care about what Ramos thinks? Most Americans are against it! Because…
Ramos may turn out to be one of the most influential journalists going into the 2016 presidential election.
“The GOP needs Univision more than Univision needs the GOP,”
“For a party looking to be competitive nationally again, they can’t risk alienating the premier outlet that caters to the fastest-growing part of the electorate.”
“There is a very simple political reality—Hispanics will decide the 2016 Presidential election. No one can match Univision’s reach and ability to inform, provide access and empower Hispanic America. Anyone who wants to reach and engage Hispanics will have to do it through Univision..
Univision lead anchor Jorge Ramos said that both parties:
“have to make sure that their debates don’t look like the 2015 Oscar nominations,” referring to the lack of diversity among the Academy’s nominees.
THE DEBATES
RNC’s scheduleis not much more encouragingas none of the anchors representing the networks are RAMOS in the reverse.
Our news outlets are at fault for not doing their job where amnesty is concerned. Millions complain about it, but none in power have had the will, drive or support to do anything about it consistently. Sarah Palin called for impeachment last year, but it fell on deaf ears across DC. It would be great if we had a powerful news anchor 24/7 defending America’s sovereignty like our nemesis on Univision does to violate it. What a dream to hear candidates answer to us accepting five non-negotiable’s in this war against amnesty:
Yes, English is our official language.
A pathway to citizenship really means amnesty.
I will not support Obama’s executive actions, DACA or DAPA.
Illegals are not ‘undocumented’ and dreamers are not the same as legal immigrants seeking documentation.
We will spend time debating deportation for lawbreakers for not just criminals, instead of how to make citizenship happen.
Americans have the right to secure their border first, and not be accused of being anti-immigrant or anti-Hispanic because of it.
Democrats are better at this, so we have to fight together to beat them on this and appeal to legal citizens and American voters affected by it.
Ingraham’s stance on amnesty has been effective in some races. She could be a good anchor, but her negatives would be she is unreliable politically: 1) she said she wasn’t going to get into presidential politics only state and local, but within 24 hours she was commenting on the national race, and 2) she is too quick and eager to back establishment candidates when push comes to shove. Chris McDaniel could be thrown into the mix just to spook the Rinos. Stuart Varney also came to mind (but I’m not sure what his stance on immigration is). We should start thinking about this and demand that the RNC providing moderators who will ask and demand clear answers, putting Priebus, our quasi-conservative media and any GOPe on notice that anyone who is for amnesty but wants to appear as they are not must take a hike!
Sarah Palin electrified millions when she dismissed Washington reporters as elitists in her VP acceptance speech, something we had never heard anyone say in politics. It was just one of the many moments that were part of that electrifying night. Who can forget those 25 seconds (:45 – 1:11)? (Schieffer’s reaction was priceless):
One month later Palin made the point to talk directly to the American without the filter of the media. We loved it. And still do!
Eight years later she is still talking to not at us, like the nation’s CEO, almost daily on her own online channel. Just today she addressed illegal immigration (again):
My advice to candidates:
TALK TO US DIRECTLY!
We cannot have a flippant attitude about immigration. It has to be done with a sense of urgency which the above presidential hopeful has. We cannot accept candidates wanting or trying to be the Candy Man to pushy Dreamers and/or innocent children who’ve been brainwashed from day one that it’s okay to break the law. Laws are our contract between government and its people and in their quest for power,
our lawmakers have become lawbreakers in helping push this agenda.
Ramos may be one of the Most Influential Latino Leaders in the world, but he is helping millions break our laws. You will get no apology from me for being for deportations, defending English as our official language, or militarizing the border. He says he never mentions his views on the evening news but Ramos gives his opinion everywhere else. When he asks if Mexicans would vote for a candidate just because they spoke Spanish, it is a legitimate question. If we had a black Republican candidate, would blacks turn out the vote for him? Not necessarily. In that regard Rubio and Cruz are wise not to run as Hispanics but on message, and that is what we vet them on, but I’m still calling Ramos out on his arrogance, racism and b.s. (making such a fuss over ethnicity) and sending this clear note to our own:
Dear Republican candidates,
We are the ones you should worry about. If you pander for illegal votes, you will lose our trust and our vote.
Your Constituents
No matter what intentions you as Republicans may have, or what your plans to reform immigration are, the majority of Latinos and/or Hispanics (camouflage for Mexican) do not and never really will sympathize with Republicans (like Ramos suggests). So why waste time on the 11 million illegal ‘birds in the bush’, when we have about 40 million legals in the hand willing to sacrifice for and abide by this country’s laws. We should be attracting Hispanics for the right reasons, not background.
The left knows no bounds on personal attacks, respect for laws or life, so it is up to us to continue pushing backing and to build an apparatus that will challenge the invasion (yes, it is an invasion and no, we’re not racists for saying so.) Tenacity and drive are key. We can start by reacting with caution to stories coming from this Spanish media because it is just like our liberal media. We have to act like Team R (relentless) vs. Team D (derelicts), regardless of party affiliation. For our sovereignty.
It remains to be seen whether Republicans will win in 2016 by courting the illegal vote. It did not help Reagan (or Americans) for him to pass amnesty in the long run. Democrats ended up not securing the border like they had promised in exchange for the 3 million amnestied. That’s what you get when you deal with Democrats.
Is Rubio a racist? No.
Is he godless? No.
Has he always wanted to pass immigration reform? Yes.
Is it a screwed up political agenda? Yes.
Is Jorge Ramos all of the above? Yes.
But immigration reform is no inevitable. We just have to fight relentlessly against it. Ramos is not just a journalist and he is not just a liberal. He represents the sleeping giant that is the future of American politics. That future is NOW.
And the power is OURS to relinquish.
###
Basta! Enough. It is time for our version of who should be America’s Most Influential Leader 2016:
If none of the above has convinced you that presidential contenders should avoid Univision like the plague, maybe this will:
The billionaire Univision owner whose company is promoting Hillary Clinton on Spanish-language media platforms is a Clinton friend who said that seeing Clinton in the White House is his “big dream” and that “Hillary is Obama’s natural successor.”
The partnership raises serious questions about the role independent media networks can play in preparing Clinton for a presidential run.
“Too Small to Fail,” a joint initiative of the childhood development research group Next Generation and the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, launched in June 2013 with the stated aim of promoting research about brain development, nutrition, and health for children aged 0 to 5. Now the project, and its spokesperson Hillary Clinton, will get a lot of face time on the largest Spanish language media network in the United States. http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/17/days-after-univision-announces-clinton-partnership-network-owner-says-hillary-presidency-his-dream/
Whew! The beginning of this interview caused quite a stir this weekend. It sounds like a slight error but knowing Univision and its history with Rubio (see next article), it was right to have it clarified. Rubio was reported to have said that the president’s DACA was important, but the translation used from media service Grabien in the original Breitbart News article read: “I believe DACA is important. It can’t be terminated from one moment to the next, because there are already people benefiting from it.” The source that came forward from Rubio’s camp said even Univision’s translation was a little imprecise, and that Rubio’s word-for-word translation should have been “But DACA, I think it’s important not to cancel it from one moment to the next because you already have people benefiting from it.” The transcript below is the one from Univision which I corrected in bold. The tape with imprecise subtitles is on their site.
Program: Al Punto with Jorge Ramos
Content: Interview with Senator Marco Rubio
Air Date: Sunday, April 19, 2015
JR: Senator Marco Rubio, thank you for speaking with us.
SMR: Thank you very much, Jorge.
JR: Senator, in your book you talk about how excited you were by Barack Obama’s campaign. Nonetheless, Barack Obama did not run as an African-American candidate. You have decided not to run as a Hispanic candidate. Why?
SMR:
Well, obviously I’m Hispanic. My heritage, that of my parents, both of them were from Cuba, and obviously, I was raised in a Hispanic community. I think that my message and our policies are policies that apply to every American. There’s no doubt that the Hispanic community is a community of hardworking people, people who are seeking to improve their lives. I do think that our message has a special impact on that community because many of them identify with that story. But I obviously think that it’s a message that applies to everyone and that a president has to work for everyone.
JR: As you know, it has always been hard for Republicans to get the Hispanic vote. I wanted to talk with you about very concrete issues that affect Hispanics directly. I would like to start with the issue of deferred action and DACA. If you made it to the White House, would you keep the DACA program; that is, Deferred Action for the Dreamers, and would you keep President Barack Obama’s executive action, which would benefit more than four million undocumented people?
SMR:
Well, DACA is going to have to end at some point. I wouldn’t undo it immediately. The reason is that there are already people who have that permission, who are working, who are studying, and I don’t think it would be fair to cancel it suddenly.
But I do think it is going to have to end. And, God willing, it’s going to end because immigration reform is going to pass. DAPA hasn’t yet taken effect, and I think it has impeded progress on immigration, on immigration reform. And since that program hasn’t taken effect yet, I would cancel it.
But DACA, I think it is important; it can’t be cancelled suddenly because there are already people who are benefiting from it. [This should read: “But DACA, I think it’s important not to cancel it from one moment to the next because you already have people benefiting from it.”;
But it is going to have to end. It cannot be the permanent policy of the United States. And I don’t think that’s what they’re asking for, either. I think that everyone prefers immigration reform.
JR: But then, to clarify, you would end DACA once immigration reform is approved. But what happens, Senator, if there is no immigration reform? Would you cancel DACA anyway?
SMR:
At some point it’s going to have to end. That is, it cannot continue to be the permanent policy of the United States. I do think that if I wind up being president, it will be possible to achieve new immigration reform. It won’t be possible for it to be comprehensive; that is, they are not going to be able to do everything in one massive bill. We already tried that a couple of years ago. We have seen that the political support isn’t there, and I think we’ve spent a lot of time on this process when we could have started moving forward through the three steps that I advocated. Unfortunately, a lot of time has been wasted on that. It has become an even more controversial issue; harder to move forward on that issue. But I still say that it’s important to modernize our system, and that means improving the way we enforce it in the future, to modernize the immigration system so that it’s not so costly and bureaucratic. And we have to deal with 12 million human beings who are already here. And nobody, nobody is advocating a plan to deport12 million human beings. So that issue has to be dealt with, as well.
JR: When you announced your candidacy, outside of the building where you announced it, there were a lot of Dreamers, protesting. And then there are some immigrant organizations that have criticized your candidacy. America’s Voice says that you have anti-immigrant positions. I would like to ask you, you were in favor of an immigration reform bill in the Senate, and you voted for it. But today, would you vote in favor of a path to legalization for 11 million undocumented people?
SMR:
Well, that can’t be done today for the following reason. I don’t think we can. I have been very clear. I, through that two-year experience, it’s very clear to me. We’re not going to have the votes or the necessary political support in Congress. Today, in some sectors of the American public, in order to move forward on this issue, unless we first prove to the American people that in the future there’s not going to be another
immigration crisis. If we do that, I think that undoubtedly the political support is going to exist to do legalization as you have said. It has to be a process similar to what we advocated in the legislation that I sponsored, and it’s the law that says that, first, the things we’re all familiar with must be present: a background check, pay a fine, begin to pay taxes, get a work permit, and after 10 years, they can apply for their residency. That would be the process, but we can’t get to that point. Politically, the support and the votes in Congress aren’t there until we prove to those members of Congress and the American people that immigration laws are going to be enforced.
JR:
Senator, I want to ask you about Cuba. I know it’s an issue close to your heart, since both your parents are Cuban immigrants. Nonetheless, the majority of Cuban-Americans agree with ending the embargo, and they also agree, according to the polls,with this new approach of President Barack Obama to Cuba. If you reached the White House and were president, would you cut relations with Cuba? And what do you think about President Barack Obama’s calling Raúl Castro “president”?
SMR:
Well, he isn’t a president. He can call himself whatever he likes, but RaúlCastro hasn’t been elected to absolutely anything. He is tyrant and a dictator. In terms of relations with Cuba, right? I would like to have relations with a free, democratic Cuba, or a country that’s making progress toward that. And that doesn’t exist. The Cuban people are the only people in Latin America who haven’t had free elections in more than 50 years. I think that is unfair, and I think the Cuban people deserve that. In my opinion, I say that it’s still a government that supports terrorism. Just today we’ve seen, this week we’ve seen the news that the FARC have again kidnapped and killed 10 people in Colombia. That is a group that receives help and support and shelter from the Cuban government.
JR:
Would you cut relations with Cuba? If you reach the White House, you’ll cut relations?
SMR:
Unless it’s a democratic country or it starts taking concrete steps toward democracy, of course.
JR: Senator, you are the youngest candidate among those who have run or will run, 43 years old. But —
SMR: 44 next month, Jorge.
JR: 44 next month. However, you have certain positions; for example, you’re against same-sex marriage, which is not what most young people believe in, according to the polls. Are you afraid of being portrayed in the media as an old young man, as some people in Latin America say?
SMR:
Well, I don’t believe that’s true. A significant percentage of Americans support my position on marriage between a woman and a man. I understand that there are discrepancies and a change of attitude, and I believe that if people want to change the laws about marriage in a democracy, in a republic, they can do so through their state legislatures. The states have always regulated marriage and can continue to do so. I believe that if the attitude in the country has changed, well, there is a democratic process through which they can make that change. What I don’t support is for the courts to determine this issue because I don’t think it’s up to the courts. I think it’s up to the political branch of each state to decide how it wants to regulate and how to define marriage laws.
JR:
And I’ll finish with a more personal question, Senator. We have had first ladies with very defined personalities: Michelle Obama, for example, or Hillary Clinton.Your wife Jeanette is Colombian-American. What would Jeanette be like as a first lady?
SMR: I think she would be excellent. She has a heart for issues, for example, the trafficking of human beings, which is a crisis today throughout the world. A person who is also interested in children’s issues and education. And also a person who, to me, is a great mother, a great wife, which is also important, right? Because having stability in the family is critical for being able to do the job well as a team. I would also consider her partof that team. But I believe that the country is going to love Jeanette when it gets to know her better.
JR: And that image that came out of you with your four children, to many,even if they were from the other political party, it reminded them of President John F.Kennedy.
SMR: Well, a figure from different times, undoubtedly. Former President Kennedy had a beautiful family as well. It’s more than an honor to know his daughter, who is now the ambassador to Japan. But, again, I believe it is important, that people want to know where you came from, what your family is like. And as we say, “My children are Colom-ban,” which is a combination of Colombian and Cuban, a very good
combination.
JR: Senator, thanks for speaking with us and I hope we can continue this conversation throughout the campaign. Thank you.
I hate Bipartisanship! Part 2 (new video). I have to be brutally honest. I have been a bit bored lately and used the time to translate some clips I found while surfing through channels on Youtube. This one is on pro-amnesty journalist Jorge Ramos’s show, ‘Al Punto’ where Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart appears with community organizer Luis V. Gutierrez to give an update on the push for amnesty. Yes, it is from last year, but if you see this like I do, you won’t be jaded. I promise. It’s always jaw-dropping to feel like a fly on a wall during a sneaky conversation, especially when the conversation reveals how a deal is being cut in DC by representatives. (Where are our hard-hitting news anchors on this issue? And why isn’t there more pressure for them to answer to us, not Ramos?) Diaz-Balart represents many Venezuelans in his district, but amnesty is never a win for Republicans. He is Cuban-American and supposedly anti-communist, just like my two other representatives, so there is no excuse for this. It is shady!
With the help of one or two Congressmen at a time, communist agitator Gutierrez gets what he wants. Seeing him work the host and his colleague is entertaining (at least to me it is), but the reality is that we are, unfortunately, witnessing the GOPe getting very comfortable being out of the shadows on this issue. John Boehner has always been pro-amnesty as Diaz-Balart attests to, but has held it back because of internal issues in our party. Despite our pressure, we lost the latest fight earlier this year on the same day Republicans greeted Netanyahu and won some praise. They allowed the funding of a DHS bill without provisions for stopping DACA or Obama’s Executive Action for two years.
We cannot get tired of calling out Republicans on this. We have to be as pernicious and consistent as our foe, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, shows. Again, it’s been a few slow days news-wise even with the presidential announcements.. kind of a lull, but I hope you enjoy this behind-the- scenes (sort of..) peek proving Boehner’s duplicity we have complained about all along, the embarrassing way some Republicans from the party that Bush has built have fought for this, and the way the extortionists are working them and hurting our country. Please remember that Jeb is scheduled to keynote with Gutierrez at a pro-amnesty Hispanic convention two weeks from today. I just can’t wait. [Yes, I can!]
RNC News Update:
WASHINGTON – The RNC announced that it has sanctioned nine debates from August 2015 through March 1, 2016. RNC Chairman Reince Priebus presented a clear vision for the debate process, including the dates, locations and sponsors.
The nine debates sanctioned between schedule is listed below:
1. Fox News – August 2015 – Ohio
2. CNN – September 2015 – California
3. CNBC – October 2015 – Colorado
4. Fox Business – November 2015 – Wisconsin
5. CNN – December 2015 – Nevada
6. Fox News – January 2016 – Iowa
7. ABC News – February 2016 – New Hampshire
8. CBS News – February 2016 – South Carolina
9. NBC/Telemundo – February 2016 – Florida
PENDING:
Fox News – March 2016 – TBD
CNN – March 2016 – TBD
Conservative Media Debate – Date TBD – Locations TBD
***
Can you guess which networks are pro-amnesty? The fix has been in. It’s time to keep this topic in the forefront of our conversation and the pressure on all representative, especially with all the distractions we shall be experiencing with the presidential hopeful campaigns in 2016.
![sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig[2]](https://thespeechatimeforchoosing.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/sarah-marvelous-eyes-trig2.jpg)
A Time For Choosing 
