California Transgender Leadership Summit

Looks like there will be something going on at USC for the Presidents' Day Weekend...

It will be California Transgender Leadership Summit, where transgender folks and their allies will be able to gather together to strategize and get active.

If I have any way of sparing time that weekend to attend, I will.

Website

Wesley Clark's State of the Union

W will deliver his "State of the Union" nonsense tomorrow. In the meantime, General Wesley Clark has delivered a sharp and to-the-point speech to the New America Foundation.

He has described America as being at a crossroads, and that the choices that we make today are crucial to the future of the country. His point is that in "spreading democracy" abroad and at home, the best way to do it is by example, not by force and empty rhetoric.

I'll read his speech again after lunch, but for now I would like to bookmark and share it.

Securing America (Wesley Clark's PAC)

Cindy Sheehan in Venezuela

Just picked up a very interesting article from ABC News through Democratic Underground.

Cindy Sheehan, in Caracas for the World Social Forum, was joined by President Hugo Chavez, as she said she'll protest in front of W's ranch again. Chavez was quoted as saying that he'd bring his own tent and join her protest.

Sheehan praised the objectives of the World Social Forum, and said that she may consider challenging Dianne Feinstein in the Democratic primaries this year, due to Feinstein's refusal to support an outright withdrawal of American troops in Iraq.

Feinstein is great, but Sheehan will definitely have my support if she runs.

And the more I learn about Chavez, whom I initially had dismissed as a freak show, the more I like him, especially as he stands up against W's cowboy diplomacy. And if homophobia is not a debilitating factor in the Venezuelan society, I will definitely consider taking my vacation dollars there, instead of John Howard's Australia and other undesirable places.

ABC News article

Amelie Mauresmo wins

I was just told that Mauresmo has won her first-ever Grand Slam title, by winning the Australian Open. Her opponent, Justine Henin-Hardenne, gave up the match a bit into the second set, complaining of pains.

It may not be the best way to win the tournament, but she won, and that's still a lot.

I'm glad that she managed to humiliate the homophobic John Howard government while at it too.

Now, I'll look forward to a repeat of this performance at the US Open, so that Mauresmo will be able to humiliate W as well.

BBC Sports article

Mann Coulter threatens to poison liberal judges

Tranny Annie is at it again. She called for poisoning Justice John Paul Stevens, saying that more conservative judges are needed.

She later clarified this remarks as a joke. But, this is as funny a joke as joking about a bomb while flying an airplane.

Coultergeist is the prime example of how right-wing and dangerous certain "members" of the transgender women's community can get.

Salon article

Diane Wilson

Code Pink activist Diane Wilson is serving a 150-day jail sentence for trespassing on a Texas chemical company's premises. She has always been outspoken about the abuses of corporatists against small-scale shrimpers like her.

I just came across a blog run by her supporters, which now features a letter from Diane stating the deplorable conditions within the prison. Thanks to Diane for exposing all that is wrong with the society that America has turned into now.

Unreasonable Women of Texas blog

Barbara Boxer speaks on Samuel Alito

I recently wrote my Senators to oppose the nomination of the far-right ideologue, Samuel Alito, to the Supreme Court.

Barbara Boxer responded with the following statement, which she presented two days ago to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

I am very proud to have her as my Senator.

According to Article II of the Constitution, justices of the Supreme Court may not be appointed by the president without the advice and consent of the United States Senate. So it is our solemn duty to consider each nomination carefully, keeping in mind the interests of the American people.

And this nomination is particularly crucial because the stakes have rarely been so high.

First, consider the context in which this nomination comes before us. The seat that Judge Alito has been nominated for is now held by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who came to the Court in 1981.

For years, Justice O'Connor has provided the tie-breaking vote and a commonsense voice of reason in some of the most important cases to come before the Court, including a woman's right to choose, civil rights, and freedom of religion.

Second, consider the tumultuous political climate in our nation. President Bush understood that in 2000 when he promised to govern from the center, and be "a uniter, not a divider." Sadly, this nomination shows that he has forgotten that promise because it is not from the center and it is not uniting the nation.

The right thing to do would have been to give us a justice in the mold of Justice O'Connor, and that is what the president should have done.

Let me be clear: I do not deny Judge Alito's judicial qualifications. He has been a government lawyer and judge for more than 20 years and the American Bar Association rated him well qualified. He is an intelligent and capable person. His family should be proud of him and all Americans should be proud that the American dream was there for the Alito family.

But after reviewing the hearing record and the record of his statements, writings and rulings over the past 24 years, I am convinced that Judge Alito is the wrong person for this job.

I am deeply concerned about how Justice Alito will impact the ability of other families to live the American dream - to be assured of privacy in their homes and their personal lives, to be secure in their neighborhoods, to have fair treatment in the workplace, and to have confidence that the power of the executive branch will be checked.

As I reviewed Judge Alito's record, I asked whether he will vote to preserve fundamental American liberties and values -

Will Justice Alito vote to uphold Congress' constitutional power to pass laws to protect Americans' health, safety, and welfare? Judge Alito's record says NO.

In the 1996 Rybar case, Judge Alito voted to strike down the federal ban on the transfer or possession of machine guns because he believed it exceeded Congress' power under the Commerce Clause. His Third Circuit colleagues sharply criticized his dissent and said that it ran counter to "a basic tenet of the constitutional separation of powers." And Judge Alito's extremist view has been rejected by six other circuit courts and the Supreme Court. Judge Alito stood alone and failed to protect our families.

In a case concerning worker protection, Judge Alito was again in the minority when he said that federal mine health and safety standards did not apply to a coal processing site. He tried to explain it as just a "technical issue of interpretation." I fear for the safety of our workers if Judge Alito's narrow, technical reading of the law should ever prevail.

Will Justice Alito vote to protect the right to privacy, especially a woman's reproductive freedom? Judge Alito's record says NO.

We have all heard about Judge Alito's 1985 job application, in which he wrote that the constitution does not protect the right of a woman to choose. He was given the chance to disavow that position during the hearings - and he refused to do so. He had the chance to say, as Judge Roberts did, that Roe v. Wade is settled law, and he refused.

He had the chance to explain his dissent in the Casey decision, in which he argued that the Pennsylvania spousal notification requirement was not an undue burden on a woman seeking an abortion because it would affect only a small number of women, but he refused to back away from his position. The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, found the provision to be unconstitutional, and Justice O'Connor, co-writing for the Court, criticized the faulty analysis supported by Judge Alito, saying that "the analysis does not end with the one percent of women" affected ... "it begins there."

To my mind, Judge Alito's ominous statements and narrow-minded reasoning clearly signal a hostility to women's rights, and portend a move back toward the dark days when abortion was illegal in many states, and many women died as a result. In the 21st century, it is astounding that a Supreme Court nominee would not view Roe v. Wade as settled law when its fundamental principle - a woman's right to choose - has been reaffirmed many times since it was decided.

Will Justice Alito vote to protect Americans from unconstitutional searches? Judge Alito's record says NO.

In Doe v. Groody in 2004, he said a police strip search of a 10-year-old girl was lawful, even though their search warrant didn't name her. Judge Alito said that even if the warrant did not actually authorize the search of the girl, "a reasonable police officer could certainly have read the warrant as doing so . . . " This casual attitude toward one of our most basic constitutional guarantees - the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches - is almost shocking. As Judge Alito's own Third Circuit Court said regarding warrants, "a particular description is the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment." We certainly do not need Supreme Court justices who do not understand this fundamental constitutional protection.

Will Justice Alito vote to let citizens stop companies from polluting their communities? Judge Alito's record says NO.

In the Magnesium Elektron case, Judge Alito voted to make it harder for citizens to sue for toxic emissions that violate the Clean Water Act. Fortunately, in another case several years later, the Supreme Court rejected the Third Circuit and Alito's narrow reading of the law. Judge Alito doesn't seem to care about a landmark environmental law.

Will Justice Alito vote to let working women and men have their day in court against employers who discriminate against them? Judge Alito's record says NO.

In 1997, in the Bray case, Judge Alito was the only judge on the Third Circuit to say that a hotel employee claiming racial discrimination could not take her case to a jury.

In the Sheridan case, a female employee sued for discrimination, alleging that after she complained about incidents of sexual harassment, she was demoted and marginalized to the point that she was forced to quit. By a vote of 10 to 1, the Third Circuit found for the plaintiff.

Guess who was the one? Only Judge Alito thought the employee should have to show that discrimination was the "determinative cause" of the employer's action. Using his standard would make it almost impossible for a woman claiming discrimination in the workplace to get to trial.

Finally, will Justice Alito be independent from the executive branch that appointed him, and be a vote against power grabs by the president? Judge Alito's record says NO.

As a lawyer in the Reagan Justice Department, he authored a memo suggesting a new way for the president to encroach on Congress' lawmaking powers. He said that when the president signs a law, he should make a statement about the law, giving it his own interpretation, whether it was consistent with what Congress had written or not. He wrote that this would "get in the last word on questions of interpretation" of the law. In the hearings, Judge Alito refused to back away from this memo.

When asked whether he believed the president could invade another country, in the absence of an imminent threat, without first getting the approval of the American people, of Congress, Judge Alito refused to rule it out.

When asked if the president had the power to authorize someone to engage in torture, Alito refused to answer.

The Administration is now asserting vast powers, including spying on American citizens without seeking warrants - in clear violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - violating international treaties, and ignoring laws that ban torture. We need justices who will put a check on such overreaching by the executive, not rubberstamp it. Judge Alito's record and his answers at the hearings raise very serious doubts about his commitment to being a strong check on an 'imperial president.'

In addition to these substantive matters, I remain concerned about Judge Alito's answers regarding his membership in the Concerned Alumni of Princeton and his failure to recuse himself from the Vanguard case, which he had promised to do.

During the hearings, we all felt great compassion for Mrs. Alito when she became emotional in reaction to the tough questions her husband faced in the Judiciary Committee. Everyone in politics knows how hard it is for families when a loved one is asked tough questions. It is part of a difficult process, and whoever said politics is not for the faint of heart was right.

Emotions have run high during this process. That's understandable. But I wish the press have focused more on the tears of those who will be affected if Judge Alito becomes Justice Alito and his out-of-the mainstream views prevail.

I worry about the tears of a worker who, having failed to get a promotion because of discrimination, is denied the opportunity to pursue her claim in court.

I worry about the tears of a mentally ill woman who is forced by law to tell her husband that she wants to terminate her pregnancy and is afraid that he will leave her or stop supporting her.

I worry about the tears of a young girl who is strip searched in her own home by police who have no valid warrant.

I worry about the tears of a mentally retarded man, who has been brutally assaulted in his workplace, when his claim of workplace harassment is dismissed by the court simply because his lawyer failed to file a well written brief on his behalf.

These are real cases in which Judge Alito has spoken. Fortunately, he did not prevail in these cases. But if he goes to the Supreme Court, he will have a much more powerful voice - a radical voice that will replace a voice of moderation and balance.

Perhaps the most important statement Judge Alito made during the entire hearing process was when he told the Judiciary Committee that he expects to be the same kind of justice on the Supreme Court as he has been a judge on the Circuit Court.

That is precisely the problem. As a judge, Samuel Alito seemed to approach his cases with an analytical coldness that reflected no concern for the human consequences of his reasoning.

Listen to what he said about a case involving an African-American man convicted of murder by an all white jury in a courtroom where the prosecutors had eliminated all African-American jurors in many previous murder trials as well.

Judge Alito dismissed this evidence of racial bias and said that the jury makeup was no more relevant than the fact that left-handers have won five of the last six presidential elections. When asked about this analogy during the hearings, he said it "went to the issue of statistics . . . (which) is a branch of mathematics, and there are ways to analyze statistics so that you draw sound conclusions from them . . . . "

That response would have been appropriate for a college math professor, but it is deeply troubling from a potential Supreme Court justice.

As the great jurist and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. wrote in 1881, "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience . . . The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics."

What Holmes meant is that the law is a living thing, that those who interpret it must do so with wisdom and humanity, and with an understanding of the consequences of their judgments for the lives of the people they affect.

It is with deep regret that I conclude that Judge Alito's judicial philosophy lacks this wisdom, humanity and moderation. He is simply too far out of the mainstream in his thinking. His opinions demonstrate neither the independence of mind nor the depth of heart that I believe we need in our Supreme Court justices, particularly at this crucial time in our nation's history.

That is why I will oppose this nomination.

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

Lesbian power on the court... again

Once upon a time, Martina Navratilova was unbeatable on the tennis courts.

Looks like another lesbian, Amelie Mauresmo of France, is going to rule supreme.

Mauresmo has just reached the women's singles final round of the Australian Open - though on a lucky break, as her semifinals opponent, Kim Clijsters of Belgium, had to retire on an injury. But it is, nevertheless, a great development for Mauresmo.

I hope she will win the Australian Open, and hopefully maybe a few more titles this year. Error-free solid play will be the key here.

BBC News article (Mauresmo beats Clijsters)

The Canadian elections

Canada had its parliamentary election yesterday. This was the first time I took a look at Canadian politics with any significant amount of interest, as I feel that (1) they may offer some lessons for Americans and (2) Canada may indeed be my future home.

The Conservatives won a minority government last night. Some were quick to describe Canadian voters' rightward shift, especially in the face of gay marriage legalization. But as far as I can see, the Liberals' recent scandals, as well as a strong challenge from the National Democratic Party (NDP), seem to be more likely culprits.

The electoral map showed concentrated Conservative strength in the Alberta prairies - a mirror of Republican strength in the US prairie states. All MPs from Alberta will be Conservatives. Liberals held on to major cities elsewhere. The huge difference seems to be in the sparsely populated rural areas, where left-leaning parties (Liberal and NDP) show strength - a huge difference from the US, where Republicans have taken over the rural areas. Only British Columbia, with Liberal strength in Vancouver and Conservative strength in the mountains, shows US-like patterns.

My conjecture is that Canadian rural folks seem to be more concerned about the economic policies of their government, favoring a more populist tone of the leftist parties; this would be a big difference from the US, where the Republicans have successfully convinced the rural community that cultural issues like abortion, gay marriage, and school prayer are more important, never mind the Big Business Republican economics that hurt the rural communities.

In any case, I want to see how the new Conservative government will lead Canada. I know for sure that even the Conservatives cannot turn Canada into a carbon copy of the US overnight, but they may try to overturn gay marriages, cozy up to W, or do something else that may not necessarily be in Canada's best interest. But at least I have more faith in Canada's election system than I do in the US's, and I expect the voters to speak up again if and when things do not go well for them.

Perhaps I should run for President...

In real life, I can't - I'm not a "natural-born American citizen." But I relish the idea of running against, and beating, a tyrant like W.

I just found a game from CNN and the History Channel which lets me experience a presidential campaign.

I'll give it a shot, and see if I can win.

eLections

Women's rights (or lack thereof) in the Bible

While participating in a discussion on Democratic Underground, I was handed a link to a webpage hosted on the Freedom From Religion Foundation. It was a partial listing of numerous Bible verses that have subjugated women as men's possessions, the source of men's sins, and perpetual second-class citizenry.

Its basic argument is that organized religions are the basis upon which rests the Western culture's oppression of womensfolk (and by extension, gays as well). It doesn't explain the oppression of women in ALL cultures (in the Far East, Confucius is primarily to blame), but it's a good starting point for further inquiry into the matter.

To think about it, religion and God (or as I shall say, Goddess) have always been corrupted by those in power to serve their own interests above their subjects. The current American corruption of Christianity is no different. Otherwise, why would God be a mean-spirited male figure in all major organized religions, when she is more of a nurturing female figure as far as I can see?

Why Women Need Freedom From Religion

Harry Belafonte speaks up again

Now, he's compared W's "Homeland Security" measures to that of the Nazi Gestapo, because of W's ability to arrest and detain Americans without charge, at will.

Thanks for speaking up, Harry!

MSNBC Article

Text of Al Gore's speech

The Raw Story has the transcript of today's Al Gore speech.

Al Gore on W's power grab

Al Gore, the man who should've been elected President in 2000 (and actually won the popular vote), has spoken today against the mad power grab by the W regime.

The RNC has nothing to say, except that W's actions against America are making America safer. Guess what? They're not.

If hardcore conservative Bob Barr is disturbed enough by W's actions to leave the Republican Party and join Al Gore today, something is seriously off the track with the W regime.

CNN article

BART carries anti-choice ads

Up in the Bay Area, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) trains and stations are carrying a series of anti-choice advertisements, from December 26 through the end of January. Many riders in this progressive region are upset, and have responded by defacing or destroying the ads.

I was alerted to this by the folks at Democratic Underground.

This wouldn't surprise me down here in Los Angeles, where Republican suburbs and conservative immigrants make the anti-choice movement quite powerful. But San Francisco and Oakland are a different story.

Perhaps BART is simply catering to its ridership - the Financial District Republicans who are pretty much the only ones able to afford BART's sky-high fares on a daily basis. Unless BART changes its policy regarding advocacy and political ads, I will not ride BART the next time I am in the Bay Area. I will drive, even though my car is expensive enough to say that I can afford BART's fares, and driving in San Francisco is a pain in the neck.

San Francisco Chronicle article

Code Pink says...

Women Say No to War.

Code Pink is collecting 100,000 signatures from women (as well as men standing in solidarity) to end current war madness, both by the W regime and by other powers.

I've been getting emails regarding this issue for the last few days, and am signing the pledge right now.

Please sign the petition as well.

More on Real ID Act

My websurfing (and a check on messages on my Hotmail account) brought me to MSNBC, where I picked up another article worth mentioning - that on the Real ID Act.

The more I see it, the less it seems to be about protecting America from foreign terrorism, and the more it seems to be about limiting Americans' freedoms and establishing a totalitarian police state.

Individual states do want to make their driver licenses and other IDs more secure, but are opposed in the implementation of the Real ID Act, due to the logistic nightmare and the high costs. There are NO provisions for reimbursing the astronomical expenses the states incur in order to comply.

It looks like the residents of most states will be barred from flying or from entering federal buildings as a result of the Real ID Act, as their states will not be able to comply in time, and the fascist bastard James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), who likes to shut down hearings when they don't go his way, is not budging a bit, citing "terrorist threats."

And honestly, if these fascists were truly concerned with airline security, they would see the airlines as security assets, and wouldn't be sitting idle as the nation's airlines keep going belly up - or in the case of United Airlines (and possibly several more), screw over its employee pension plan just to survive. An airline with disgruntled employees is NOT a safe airline, and certainly not a national security asset, yet the fascists let it happen. This is proof that the fascists want total power, not national security.

Moreover, the fascists in Arizona forced me to give up my "proper" IDs in 2001, just a year after I got them. With Real ID Act, it will be harder than ever to get my proper IDs back. The Arizona social worker in charge used his Latino Catholic morals to force me into a living arrangement - and identity - against my will. I will NEVER forgive the Catholic community for this (and its opposition to women's rights and support of the W agenda) as long as I live.

Perhaps the only silver lining in the implementation of the Real ID Act will be that the socially conservative immigrants will be just as screwed as I am - in fact, more so. Not a good reward for so selflessly supporting the Republican agenda.

MSNBC article

You are a terrorist if...

... you are peacefully and legally protesting the mass murder of 100,000 innocent civilians.

Meanwhile, the one doing the 100,000 murders is NOT a terrorist.

Such is the rationale being used by a classified Department of Defense database, which one of my Senators, Dianne Feinstein, is inquiring into.

The more I observe the W regime, the less I like it. This regime is nothing short of a terrorist outlaw, and must be stopped, though I am starting to think more and more, that the likes of Diebold are ensuring that it won't be stopped.

MSNBC report

Another argument for banning further Korean immigration

The Korean-American community is a collection of right-wing extremist oddballs, at odds with the values of both the United States of America and the Republic of Korea. With extremists like Reverend Sun Myong Moon and former Congressman Jay C. Kim, not to mention all those Christian charities and organizations that have done everything to further an otherwise-dead neocon Republican agenda in California and other "blue" states (and bolstering it in Texas and other "red" states), this community does NOT need a recognition in the form of the "Korean-American Day" this coming Friday - it needs to be shut down before it becomes the next Cuban-American community, complete with its political influence.

Here is yet another argument as to why further Korean immigration must be shut down right now. John Yoo, a W counsel, has argued for torturing of children of suspects, including crushing the child's testicles. I thought the Park Chung-hee fascist regime ended in 1979 with his assassination; apparently its adherents live on in America. (Well, South Korea did have another fascist dictator, Chun Doo-hwan, in the 1980s, but his rule ended with democratic elections.) Child torture is something I would've expected Park to do, not a "democracy" like the United States of America. But W is intent on turning America into Park-style fascist dictatorship, and he is bringing in all the pro-fascist Koreans he can to make it happen.

The Cuban community has damaged the institutions of the United States beyond repair, and it's too late to fight them now. Don't let the Korean community do the same. Already, tax evasion, exploitation of illegal labor, and other offenses are at dangerously high levels in Los Angeles' Koreatown.

And please refuse to patronize the South Korean conglomerates who support the fascists' agenda both in South Korea and the United States. Hanjin (Korean Air, which gambled with passengers' lives by turning Flight 007 into a covert spying mission in 1983) and anti-labor Samsung come to mind.

Mathaba News article (found on Angry Asian Man)

Harry Belafonte also says...

... that W is the world's worst terrorist. He said this while visiting Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

I read this on Yahoo!, following a link from the ReBelle Nation blog.

Yahoo! article

Cindy Sheehan writes...

Peace activist Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son Casey to the Iraq War, did a peace tour of Europe last month. She wrote about the experience as an editorial on TruthOut.

Her writing confirms my view of W as the world's most dangerous man, and British PM Tony Blair as his number one accomplice. And it is good to know that Europeans are listening.

TruthOut article

The World's Worst Terrorist Organization

Let's see here...

Pat Robertson has called for the assassination of a sovereign nation's elected leader, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Now, he's rejoicing at the illness of Ariel Sharon of Israel, because he "attempted to divide God's land and give it away to the Palestinians."

John Bolton has given absolutely no regard for the international community and consensus-building.

Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Alberto Gonzales have maintained that torture is not acceptable - except torture done by the United States.

And of course, George W. Bush has been spying on ordinary Americans and political opponents (a Kerry staffer seems to have been wiretapped in 2004). He believes that the Geneva Convention does not apply to "enemy combatants," whose definition he will stretch at will to include political opponents. He did try to lock me up without reason back in 2001. He's already proclaimed that "there ought to be limits to freedom," and he means it by supporting constitutional amendments that will, for the first time, limit Americans' rights.

W also is in charge of the most awesome firepower in human history, a military that has a bigger budget than the rest of the world combined.

It looks like the face of terrorism is not necessarily that of a desperate band of Arabic men in turbans out in the deserts. By flouting international law and consensus, claiming to be above both American and international law, and treating the military as a pricey toy box instead of the "defender of freedom" they claim it to be, the W administration and its Christian cronies have become the most powerful, most destructive, scariest terrorists on the face of this planet. The only thing that prevents this terrorist force from becoming even more destructive than the likes of Adolf Hitler is the democratic tradition of the United States that even these thugs cannot overthrow overnight.

Note that I did not include the Republican Party as part of this terrorist organization, because even though the organization is made up of Republicans, there are also old-school Republicans who are seeing a massive expansion of government powers - and speaking out against it. I may disagree with the likes of John McCain, Bob Barr, and Walter Jones on just about everything else, but these Republicans have made it clear that they don't like the terrorists' power grab.

Remember the anguish when al-Qaeda killed 3,000 American civilians in the World Trade Center in 2001? Where is the anguish when W kills 100,000 Iraqi civilians in the name of "bringing them freedom?" Freedom that they still are not seeing yet, and will most likely never see?

And I am not even counting the terror of those Suburbans, Hummers, Exploitations, Sequoias, and other SUVs on Main Street, USA, driven by the supporters of this terrorist band.

The global community seems to agree. It is fearing the United States more than the likes of al-Qaeda, and that's not a pretty picture.

American Prospect on Immigration

Today, I somehow ran into an American Prospect series on immigration crisis, which ran back in November. It deals with the immigration amnesty of 1986, how it failed, and what the McCain-Kennedy guest worker program proposes to do, as well as what a true immigration reform must and must not include.

Immigration is a volatile issue that has divided both of the major political parties, as well as their constituencies. Business and labor have found themselves together in the pro-immigration camp, as business needs more cheap labor, and unions need to grow their ranks. Nativists and the working class voters are joined in the anti-immigration camp, seeing immigrants bring down the wages and threaten traditional American culture. The anti-immigration camp has even seen white supremacists and African-Americans work together.

I am fed up with using immigrants as political pawns, particularly by Republicans as they offer amnesties and special visa quotas for nationalities that are likely to vote Republican. The most blatant example is automatic refugee status for Cuban arrivals, though the recent Congressional designation of January 13th as the "Korean-American Day," the first for any ethnicity in America, doesn't fall far behind (in fact, my father's presence in the US itself owes to backroom deals between Reagan and South Korea's fascist dictatorships). Using immigrants as pawns have netted Republicans with handsome gains, particularly as they try to push an anti-choice, anti-women, and anti-gay agenda with the help of social conservatives in these immigrant communities. And American Prospect rightfully points out that despite the nativist tone of one wing of the Republican Party, the party's pro-immigrant wing has been very effective, while the progressives have taken the immigrants for granted and made no progress with them.

This has to stop. Immigration must be reformed to primarily help the economic needs of the country. Both high-skilled and low-skilled workers need to be brought into the country according to the labor market demand, and all of them need to be subject to the same rights and responsibilities of American workers, including the right to organize, and the duty to pay income and payroll taxes. It is common practice for building contractors here in Southern California to hire illegals at slave-wage prices to work around union-wage American workers; this must stop, and either the immigrants must be paid prevailing wage, or the American labor must be used. And most importantly, all nationalities must be treated equally; no preferences shall ever be given to politically expedient nationalities.

And as I repeat, and the American Prospect points out, the Democrats and the progressives need to play the immigration game as well as the Republicans. At both the pro- and anti-immigrant ends, the Republicans are doing very well; they are pushing a nativist, white supremacist, Christian agenda AND bringing in nonwhite immigrants who will suck up to it. This is called having your cake and eating it too. I will not tolerate this.

American Prospect

Jack Abramoff pleads guilty

The Republicans' master lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, is pleading guilty to charges of conspiracy, tax evasion, and mail fraud. He will face up to 30 years in prison, but he will now be able to cooperate with the authorities in digging up further dirt in the W regime and the Republican Party.

This, along with the indictment of Libby, puts a serious dent in the Republican image of morality. The Republican culture of corruption is what enabled someone like W to take over the entire federal government, and build a police state around it. Now, W's empire is about to fall apart at its weakest link - corrupt lobbyists and officials.

I expect more Republicans to fall prey as their improper ties to the likes of vote-manipulating Diebold and other outside influences are uncovered. But justice won't be served until W and Cheney themselves are forced out of the White House in handcuffs - and their followers in my neck of the woods are silenced by the truth.

Again, if staining a blue dress is grounds for impeachment, so is the scandal unfolding now - in fact, grounds for much more than just impeachment.

USA Today article

Greeting the New Year

Between the renovation of my living quarters and a nasty cold, I haven't been able to blog, or participate in my usual online activities.

But 2005, a year that started in the doldrums but ended well for me, is now history. Now, 2006 is here.

I want to continue the political activities that have kept my head up in my current neighborhood, where people continue to worship the world's most dangerous outlaw/terrorist, and the mean patriarchal God that guides him.

I also want to continue my work on my novel, which has been sidetracked by the cold and the home renovations. It is one of the few ways I can express my feelings and meet people who appreciate them. I hope I will be able to finish the novel.

I will see if I can turn the potential opportunities I explored in Korea back in November, into solid sources of income.

There are so many things lying ahead of me in 2006. I want to turn these into a great year that accomplishes a lot. And as I enter my 30s, I want to establish a life for myself, something that's next to impossible to do in the conservative suburbs.

Happy new year.