Meet The East Bay’s Newest Progressive Patron Saint

ILLUSTRATION/Steven Tavares PHOTO/Matt Santos

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

Valle speaking to voters last November
in Union City. PHOTO/Matt Santos

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Categories: Alameda, Alameda County Board, Americas Cup, Bonta, domestic drones, drones, Fruitvale Station, Oakland police, Quan, Richard Valle, Scott Haggerty, secure communities

150 replies

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

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

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

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

    Aqui! Aqui!

    Like

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

    Like

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

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

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

    Like

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

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

    Like

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

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

    Like

  11. I agree–Amen–zzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Like

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Five Reasons Immigration Reform Matters

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

    http://capitolhilloutsider.com/americans-dont-want-blanket-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens/

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

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Like

  21. And so it begins–si se puede

    Like

  22. Aqui! Aqui!

    Like

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

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

    Like

  24. Reform yes, but does not = amnesty.

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

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

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

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

    http://capitolhilloutsider.com/americans-dont-want-blanket-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens/

    LAYFA–Laughing at your fat ass.

    Like

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

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

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

    http://capitolhilloutsider.com/americans-dont-want-blanket-amnesty-for-illegal-aliens/

    LAYFA!

    Like

  30. AQUI! AQUI!

    Like

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

    Like

  32. Aqui? Aqui?—Talking to yourself again 10:15? Wow

    Like

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

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

    Temper. Temper.

    LAYFA

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Please don't let the facts confuse your fantasy.

    Americans don’t want blanket amnesty for illegal aliens

    By Frosty Wooldridge:

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

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

    Among the findings of the survey:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Eugenicist Frosty Wooldridge has the rabid right all atwitter!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

    I actually READ the preceding posted article.

    Gets my vote!

    Like

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

    FROSTY WOOLDRIDGE
    AGE: 58
    LOUISVILLE, COLO.

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

  40. NO environmental organization would claim him–stop your lying 8:06

    Like

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

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

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

    Better take your blood pressure meds.

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Like

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

    Anti-Immigrant Front Group Courts Progressives With Shoddy Polling Data

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Like

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

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

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

    Like

  46. 3:29 continued

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

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

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

    Like

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

    Got my vote!

    Like

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

    Like

  49. Written like a true fanatic.

    Like

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

    Readers judge for yourselves—-over and out

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: