Latinos Seek Citizenship to Vote Against Trump

After the 2012 presidential election loss, the GOP conducted a post mortem to determine the party's future path so as to avoid becoming a permanent minority party at the presidential level.   Among other things, the study findings were that the party needed to be more open to minorities and less reliant on aging white voters.  That insight has been flushed down the toilet with the rising racism in the GOP best embodied by Donald Trump, but also echoed by Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, Hispanics themselves.  The anti-minority bigotry and hatred displayed by the GOP base is not going unnoticed.  Now, as the New York Times reports, Latinos legally in the country are rushing to obtain citizenship so that they can vote Democratic in November.  Here are story highlights:

Donald J. Trump’s harsh campaign language against Mexican immigrants has helped him win a substantial delegate lead in the Republican primaries, but it is also mobilizing a different set of likely voters — six in the family of Hortensia Villegas alone.

A legal immigrant from Mexico, Ms. Villegas is a mother of two who has been living in the United States for nearly a decade but never felt compelled to become a citizen. But as Mr. Trump has surged toward the Republican nomination, Ms. Villegas — along with her sister, her parents and her husband’s parents — has joined a rush by many Latino immigrants to naturalize in time to vote in November.

“I want to vote so Donald Trump won’t win,” said Ms. Villegas, 32, one of several hundred legal residents, mostly Mexicans, who crowded one recent Saturday into a Denver union hall. Volunteers helped them fill out applications for citizenship, which this year are taking about five months for federal officials to approve. “He doesn’t like us,” she said.

Over all, naturalization applications increased by 11 percent in the 2015 fiscal year over the year before, and jumped 14 percent during the six months ending in January, according to federal figures. The pace is picking up by the week, advocates say, and they estimate applications could approach one million in 2016, about 200,000 more than the average in recent years.

While naturalizations generally rise during presidential election years, Mr. Trump provided an extra boost this year. 

“A lot of people are opening their eyes because of all the negative stuff Donald Trump has brought,” said Ms. Villegas’s husband, Miguel Garfío, 30, who was born and raised in Colorado and came to the workshop here to help his wife and other family members become citizens. His parents came from Mexico in the 1980s and worked hard all their lives, he said, helping him create a construction company in Denver that now employs 18 people. Contrary to Mr. Trump’s depiction, he said, none of his relatives have criminal records.

A majority of Latinos are Democrats, and some Republicans accuse the White House of leading a thinly veiled effort to expand the ranks of the president’s party. But administration officials argue the campaign is nonpartisan, noting that immigrants who become citizens improve their incomes and chances for homeownership.

Aside from Colorado, naturalization drives are taking place in Nevada and Florida, states likely to be fiercely contested in November where Latino voters could provide a crucial margin. One nonprofit group, the New Americans Campaign, plans to complete 1,500 applications at a session in the Marlins Park baseball stadium in Miami on March 19.

Among the groups the White House is supporting are immigrant rights organizations and labor unions, which say their goal in holding dozens of citizenship workshops this spring is to build immigrant voting power.

[I]n a poll of Latino voters on Feb. 25 by The Washington Post and Univision, the Spanish language television network, 80 percent had an unfavorable view of Mr. Trump, including 72 percent with a very unfavorable view, far more than for other Republican candidates.

Mary Victorio, 22, a Mexican-born student at the University of Colorado Denver, said she would vote Democratic but was grateful in one way to Mr. Trump. “He gave us that extra push we needed to get ready to vote, to prove to people who see us negatively they are wrong,” she said.

House Republicans Seek to Revoke Birth Right Citizenship

Some in the GOP ranks seemingly never cease in their quest to attack immigrants and find ways to deport Hispanics in particular.  How this will help any GOP presidential candidate win votes outside of the shrinking angry white base of party is mind numbing.  But then again, much of the agenda of today's GOP is mind numbing and down right ugly.  The latest target of GOP hate: removing a provision of the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil. One would have to be blind not to see that the motivation behind the effort is to revoke the citizenship of children of undocumented immigrants born in America which furthers the white supremacist demands of much of the GOP base.  The Washington Post looks at the effort.  Here are highlights:

The Civil War era’s 14th Amendment, granting automatic citizenship to any baby born on American soil, is a proud achievement of the Party of Lincoln. But now House Republicans are talking about abolishing birthright citizenship. 

A House Judiciary subcommittee took up the question Wednesday afternoon, prompted by legislation sponsored by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) and 22 other lawmakers that, after nearly 150 years, would end automatic citizenship. 

The 14th Amendment, King told the panel, “did not contemplate that anyone who would sneak into the United States and have a baby would have automatic citizenship conferred on them.” Added King, “I’d suggest it’s our job here in this Congress to decide who will be citizens, not someone in a foreign country that can sneak into the United States and have a baby and then go home with the birth certificate.”

It’s no small task to undo a principle, enshrined in the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court, that defines the United States as a nation of immigrants. It’s particularly audacious that House Republicans would undo a century and a half of precedent without amending the Constitution but merely by passing a law to reinterpret the 14th Amendment’s wording in a way that will stop the scourge of “anchor babies” and “birth tourism.”

Judiciary Committee Republicans . . . .  had to search far and wide for people who would take this view, because they ended up with a bizarre witness: an octogenarian professor from the University of Texas named Lino Graglia.

This would be the Lino Graglia who caused a furor in 1997 when he said that Latinos and African Americans are “not academically competitive with whites” and come from a “culture that seems not to encourage achievement.” He also said at the time that “I don’t know that it’s good for whites to be with the lower classes.”

And this is the very same Lino Graglia whose nomination for a federal judgeship in the 1980s fell apart amid allegations that he had urged Austin residents to defy a court-ordered busing plan and had used the racist word “pickaninny” in the classroom.

Abolishing automatic citizenship for babies born on American soil, and having Graglia make the case, probably won’t help Republicans overcome their problems with minorities, who are gradually becoming the majority.

Democrats, by happenstance, presented a sharp contrast to the GOP effort Wednesday: Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and others met at Washington’s Carnegie Library with a coalition including immigration and civil rights advocates to launch a new jobs campaign, “Putting Families First.”

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) read aloud some of Graglia’s other comments about minorities. . . . . . The congressman asked that Graglia’s past statements be entered into the record. But Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) complained that the line of inquiry was “a non-germane subject for this hearing.”

The GOP seems hell bent to continue on a path of slow political suicide. 

Senate Immigration Reform Supporters Targets House Republicans

With immigration reform legislation approved by the U. S. Senate, the battle now goes to the GOP controlled House of Representatives where racism and extremism are the main hallmarks of House Republicans as they pander to the ugliest elements of the GOP base: angry elderly whites, white supremacists and, of course, the Christofascists who are anything but loving Christians.   Whether or not Senate Republicans can force the GOP House members to do what's right will remain to be seen.  Politico looks at the coming conflict within the GOP.  Here are excerpts:

Big Business, Senate Republicans and Democrats backing immigration reform have a target in their crosshairs: House Republicans.

Senators like John McCain (R-Ariz), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) met with tech giants such as Microsoft, Google and Intel, and pro reform groups like FWD.us to discuss a coordinated campaign to target more than 100 House Republicans on reforming the nation’s immigration laws when they are at home in their districts over the next month, according to sources familiar with the meeting.

Graham suggested getting people to target Republicans at town hall meetings. Schumer said he wanted pastors giving sermons about the need for immigration reform.

McCain urged the group to push for the Senate bill by discussing its component parts — but not mentioning the overall bill.  Graham said that there are between 30 and 40 Republicans who are staunchly opposed to the Senate bill — but warned that number cannot grow.

It’s not too often that you hear about Republicans and Democrats privately discussing targeting each other to support legislation, but it’s clear that senators see their comprehensive immigration reform effort hitting stiff resistance in the House. McCain suggested to the group that they’re losing the messaging battle to immigration opponents.

The GOP leadership of the House believes that nearly all Republicans oppose the Senate bill.  ”The House will not take up the Senate immigration bill. There are many issues related to immigration reform on which the business community, religious groups and House Republicans can find common ground, but advocating for the House consideration of the Senate immigration bill is simply a waste of their time and resources,” one House GOP leadership aide said.

Illegal Immigrants Now More Popluar than GOP

The rabid agenda of the Republican Party to denigrate and discriminate against anyone who isn't an angry white conservative Christian and preferably male continues unabated despite the navel contemplation going on among the few rational folks and non-racists left in the party.  To the GOP base, the idea of immigration reform is beyond abhorrent and is continually described as "amnesty" for law breakers.    As a piece in The Guardian - which often has better coverage of U.S. politics than many newspapers in the USA - notes, support for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants now far exceeds favorable views of the Republican Party which is a little over 30%.  Not that this political reality means anything to the rabid Christofascist/Teabagistan base of the GOP.   Here are some article highlights:

The electoral analysis of the immigration debate these days almost exclusively focuses on Latinos, which makes sense, but also misses the point. Not only do I personally think that most Latino voters won't change their voting allegiance in response to any new immigration reform, but also let's note that all Americans are shifting their views on immigration.

An overwhelmingly majority of Americans now believe that people who came to this country illegally should not be forced to leave it. In the latest CBS News poll, 74% of Americans – a record high – believe that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to apply for citizenship or stay as guest workers. That's up from 57% in mid-2011. Per a Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) survey, there isn't a single demographic group opposed to this proposal, and that includes Tea Partiers, Republicans and white people without a college degree.

More amazingly, more Americans now believe in a pathway to citizenship, rather than a guest worker program. CBS News found that a majority of Americans, 53%, are now in favor of letting immigrants stay and apply for citizenship. That percentage is way up from 37% in 2011, while the percentage of Americans who support a guest worker program has stayed steady, at about 20%.

A slim majority of Americans now believes that an immigration plan should focus on providing legal residency to people here, rather than on stopping the flow of immigrants into the country. Per CNN/ORC, the generational divide is wide. Over 60% of those under 50 put priority on integration, while those 50 and older are far more evenly split. Majorities of Democrats, independents and white people prioritize residency. 

Indeed, the attitude towards immigrants themselves has changed tremendously over the past few years. Today, 49% of Americans believe that the hard work of immigrants strengthens the country, and only 41% believe they are a burden, according to Pew.

The real problem for the Republican party is that its brand is currently in the can. With favorable numbers in the low 30s, the GOP is seen as out-of-step with Americans on many issues.

That's why you're seeing Democrats jumping out to a large lead on the House ballot for 2014. The latest Quinnipiac poll puts Democrats up by 8pt, more than enough for them to take back the House. Voters are, at this point, not willing to vote for the party that opposes what they believe in. What Republicans don't need, then, is another issue – that is, immigration – that contributes to notion that they're out-of-touch with the way most Americans feel.

Opposing immigration reform would be yet another instance of GOP "obstructionism", which is what most people see as the Republicans' biggest fault.

Will the GOP get the message and stop pandering to the racists and hate merchants in the GOP base?  Probably not.

Is Jeb Bush Committing Political Suicide With His Immigrastion Shift?

Let's get one thing clear up front: the freaking last thing that America needs is another Bush in the White House.  Admittedly, Jeb Bush isn't a total cretin like his brother W, but the so-called Bush dynasty needs to go the way of the Bourbon and Hapsburg dynasties.  Another Bush in the White House would be a serious basis for simply leaving the United States.  But perhaps that's a worry that we will not need to face.  At least not if Jeb Bush keeps up his talk of barring a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants and providing instead some form of permanent guest worker status.  While it is true that today's GOP base views Hispanics (and, of course, blacks) as worthy of some form of non-voting serfdom, the changing Demographics of the country suggest that Bush's flip flopping plan could be political suicide.  Yes, he might win the GOP nomination, but he could well prove to be Mitt Romney II in the general election.  Politico looks at Bush's apparent effort to prostitute himself to the GOP base which at this point do everything short of donning KKK robs before assembling for local city and county committees and caucuses.  Here are some article excerpts:

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s changing immigration stances over the past two days sparked an outpouring of opposition on Tuesday, with liberal groups decrying the suggestion of of anything less than a pathway to full citizenship.

“It’s going to hurt Jeb Bush with Latino voters a lot more than it’s going to hurt the bipartisan process,” Frank Sharry, the head of the pro-reform group America’s Voice, said on a conference call with reporters.

Bush had long been a leading GOP advocate of comprehensive immigration reform and had backed a pathway to full citizenship in the past. But he released a book on Tuesday arguing for mere legal status, not full citizenship, for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. He has since backed off that position, saying he would support a pathway to citizenship provided it doesn’t create an incentive to enter the country illegally.

“Latino voters are saying they want an immigration bill that includes, and let me say this emphatically, a pathway to citizenship,” Service Employees International Union Secretary-Treasurer Eliseo Medina said, adding: “The notion of no citizenship is flat-out unacceptable. If that was a trial balloon, it’s time to let it go because if won’t fly.”

Democrats and liberals have long said legal status without citizenship would condemn illegal immigrants to a life as permanent second-class residents of the U.S.

“Are we really suggesting that the United States Congress will take a vote to relegate an entire community to underclass status?” asked National Council of La Raza immigration director Clarissa Martinez de Castro. “Latino voters will not look kindly on this.”

The poll, conducted by Latino Decisions, and sponsored by the SEIU, NCLR and America’s Voice, showed that Hispanic voters would punish Republicans if comprehensive immigration reform fails in 2013.

Three-fifths of Hispanic voters said they would blame the GOP if immigration reform doesn’t pass this year, and only 15 percent said they would blame Democrats. Sixty-four percent said Republicans are to blame for immigration reform having stalled over the past decade.

The cost to the GOP for blocking immigration reform is easy to see. Forty-four percent said supporting immigration reform could help a Republican earn their vote, while 42 percent said blocking such a bill would make them less likely to vote for a Republican. Even one-third of Hispanic Republicans said blocking immigration reform would make them less likely to back a member of their own party.

I continue to be dumbfound at the GOP's willingness to stake the party's future on pander to a dwindling number of elderly white racists and religious fanatics.

Michele Bachmann: Swiss Citizen Since 1978

The ever insane and modern day Pharisee Michele Bachmann likes to question Barack Obama's citizenship and eligibility to hold the office of president, yet Ms. Bachmann has some citizenship issues of her own.  Such as her own Swiss citizenship that has apparently existed for 34 years.  If she wants to hold herself out as uber-American patriot, perhaps she should relinquish her own foreign citizenship.  That, course, would mean not being a hypocrite, so don't expect to see that happen anytime soon unless Bachmann is pressured by the Kool-Aid drinking GOP base.  Politico looks at Ms. Bachmann's heretofore undisclosed Swiss citizenship.  Here are highlights: 

Rep. Michele Bachmann tried to downplay her dual U.S.-Swiss citizenship Wednesday, releasing a statement that asserts she has actually been a dual citizen since 1978.  “I automatically became a dual citizen of the United States and Switzerland in 1978 when I married my husband, Marcus. Marcus is a dual American and Swiss citizen because he is the son of Swiss immigrants. As a family, we just recently updated our documents,” the Minnesota Republican and former presidential candidate said in a statement. “This is a non-story.”

According to her version of events, Bachmann has known she was a Swiss citizen for approximately 34 years. However, she never disclosed her citizenship while running for Congress and president of the United States.  Her office said that such a disclosure was not necessary.

Her statement that she has been a citizen since 1978 is based off a technicality - at the time of her marriage, automatic citizenship was granted to those who married Swiss citizens. However, Marcus Bachmann, her husband, did not register their marriage with Swiss authorities until this year - meaning that the Swiss government was not aware of it until recently.

Bachmann, who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, is now running for reelection in Minnesota’s 6^th Congressional District.  “This is simply another distraction,” said a spokesperson for Democratic challenger Jim Graves on Wednesday. “The Graves family is not interested in dual citizenship and they are proud to be Americans.”

Army Birther Convicted on All Counts

I continually wonder how some of the far right came to be as crazy and untethered from reality. At the top of the list - okay, right behind some of the looniest fundamentalist Christians -are the birthers who, despite all of the evidence, continue to insist that Barack Obama, a/k/a the Liar-in-Chief, is not a native born citizen of the United States. They apparently failed geography and American history since Obama's birth in Hawaii makes him a U. S. citizen much more firmly than John McSenile who was born in the former Panama Canal Zone. One such Kool-Aid drinking birther is Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, an Army physician (I don't believe I'd want him treating me if he's this nuts), who refused to follow orders based upon his insistence that Obama had failed to prove his Constitutional eligibility to serve as commander-in-chief. Fortunately, the court martial which took up Lakin's case was not amused and convicted Lakin on all charges. Here are highlights from Wing Nut Daily, which will likely try to make Lakin a hero/martyr:
*
Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin apologized today for forcing the Army to court-martial him in hopes of compelling President Barack Obama to prove his Constitutional eligibility to serve as commander-in-chief.
*
Convicted on all four charges against him, Lakin told his court-martial panel he is through disobeying orders and would resume his military career if the Army would let him.
*
Note this comment from a birther blogger:
*
I am angry about this," said court-martial observer Dr. Catherine Vandemoer, a well-known blogger on eligibility issues who traveled from North Dakota to support Lakin. "The system has failed," Vandemoer told WND. "They crushed him, and the questions about Obama's eligibility have still not been answered."

We Must Save the 14th Amendment

Section one of the 14th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution reads as follows:
*
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
*
Not surprisingly, the recent pro-gay court decisions in the federal courts have all relied on the equal protection guaranties found in this language as the basis for striking down Prop. 8 and portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Obviously, this reality makes it important to the LGBT community that the elements of the far right not be allowed to attempt to amend this important provision to the U. S. Constitution.

*

But gays are not the only ones at risk if the Tea Party crowd, Christianists and white supremacists are allowed to have their way and either repeal or severely modify this incredibly important constitutional provision. Virtually EVERY minority would be put at risk without the protections afforded by the equal protection and due process provisions 14th Amendment. Of equal importance are the rights of citizenship it grants to all those born in this nation. Since the nation's beginnings being born in the USA - regardless of whether or not codified - being born here (except in the case of slaves and American Indians prior to the 14th Amendment's addition to the Constitution) granted citizenship. This long standing right could be radically altered if anti-immigrant activists, white supremacists and GOP members of Congress were to succeed in pushing a proposal to end this citizenship by birth. The obvious goal? To strip citizenship from mostly Hispanic born in the county to unnaturalized parents. Such proposals ought to to scare the Hell out of rational people. An op-ed in The Advocate looks at this topic and the faulty history of those seeking to sully the 14th Amendment. Here are some details:
*
Gay people have a real interest in fighting the effort to strip birthright citizenship from the 14th amendment, says Immigration Equality executive director Rachel B. Tiven.
*
Don’t know much about history, do they? That’s a sad statement to make about the U.S. Congress, but evidently a true one, given the recent pile-on of Republican senators calling for repeal — or “investigation” — of birthright citizenship. Senate majority leader Harry Reid noted that his colleagues have “either taken leave of their senses or their principles.” In fact, they may have taken leave of both, as their ridiculous, racist campaign betrays a basic misunderstanding of American history and of the Constitution.
*
Before the Civil War, there was no definition of American citizenship. Slaves were not citizens, and women’s citizenship was tenuous at best. A woman who married a foreign national could be stripped of her citizenship, and of course, women, slaves, and most nonwhites could not vote. Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution, as originally ratified, defined who was an American citizen or how to become one. The Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision — which brought pre-Civil War tensions closer to a boil by holding that Congress could not prohibit slavery in federal territory — reaffirmed that “Negroes” were not and could not be citizens.
*
The Fourteenth Amendment was the centerpiece of Reconstruction, and it finally provided the United States with a definition of who exactly was a citizen. Its very first words read: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
*
Reread that sentence and ask yourself, Without it, who would be an American? Would I? On what basis? In a nation where 98% of us are here as the result of immigration at some point in time, who among us has been here “long enough”? Who gets to decide?
*
LGBT people should find this particularly disgusting. At Immigration Equality, we hear every day from people who face double discrimination: because they are immigrants and simultaneously because they are also lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.
*
Those dual lines of attack are no coincidence: The very same people who are leading the charge to strip citizenship from the children of immigrants are those who have long led the charge to strip the rights of full citizenship from LGBT people. On the latter front, their crusades are beginning to falter, with historic judicial and legislative victories affirming the rights of LGBT people. Sadly, politicians desperate for a scapegoat in an era of recession and war are attacking not only the newest citizens, they are attacking our precious Constitution.
*
Personally, I'd like to see more individuals and politicians go on the attack against the GOP white supremacists like Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell. They took a oath to uphold and support the U. S. Constitution and now they want to gut one of it's most important provisions. If they want to go on a campaign against the Constitution, fine, but they need to resign from office in order to do so.

Top Congressional Republicans Want 14th Amendment Repealed

As if the insanity of Ken Cuccinelli in here in Virginia isn't scary enough, now we have prominent Congressional Republicans stating that they'd support a repeal of the 14th Amendment - that's right, the 14th Amendment that guarantees citizenship, equal protection under the law and due process. Here's the language that the GOP apparently wants stripped or limited from the Constitution:
*
Amendment XIV, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
*
For a political party that whines incessantly that it wants a literal application of the United States Constitution the hypocrisy is beyond belief. This movement also makes one wonder when the due process and equal protection clauses will be targeted by these "true Americans." Leading the cry are the GOP's closeted queens Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. It truly is frightening where the GOP seems to be headed and this batshitery ought to scare the Hell out of all rational, thinking Americans (obviously, that excludes the GOP base and Sarah Palin devotees). Here are some highlights from the Huffington Post:
*
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) officially supports a review of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which grants children of undocumented immigrants status as U.S. citizens, his office confirmed to the Huffington Post on Monday.
*
In offering his support, McConnell becomes the highest-ranking Republican figure to call for examining the reach of the 14th amendment. On Sunday, his chief deputy, Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) told CBS' Face the Nation that he too would back hearings into revising citizenship laws. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) -- a one-time proponent of comprehensive immigration reform -- has explicitly called for the 14th Amendment's repeal.
*
The statements from GOP leaders give credence to the notion that revising longstanding citizenship laws is quickly becoming a plank of the party's platform. In the House of Representatives, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) has introduced the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009, which would attempt to deny children of illegal immigrants U.S. citizenship through statute rather than a constitutional amendment (thereby lowering the vote threshold).
*
I have been accused of overstating the lunacy and/or malignant agenda of today's GOP and that party's base which wants nothing less than to strip other citizens of rights and now even citizenship itself. WTF is happening to this country?

Need A Job? Try Canada

I first visited Canada as child of about five with my mothers parents, crossing into Ontario near the Seaway Locks in northern New York. Later as a teenager I crossed the border with friends at Niagara Falls and visited the beautiful beaches on the north shore of Lake Erie. But I fully fell in love with Canada - and British Columbia in particular _ when my son (pictured in the photo above at Whistler) and I visited Vancouver, Whistler, Victoria and other parts of British Columbia in July, 2004. Not only is Canada relatively gay friendly - it's utopia compared to Virginia - but now, Canada has much more to offer economically. Canada - even tough far, far smaller than the USA - is producing more new jobs that the USA, but it also has a vibrant housing market. The loons of the far right and Christianist controlled GOP may malign Canada, but the USA has much it should learn from our neighbor to the north. I can honestly state that if our circumstances were different, Canada could well be a possible destination should we decide to emigrate. Here are highlights from a piece at Huffington Post:
*
Stubbornly high unemployment rates got you down? Not sold on the economic recovery? Look no further than America's polite neighbor to the north, where jobs numbers are surging and home prices have been rising steadily for nearly a year.
*
Last month, Canada, a nation with roughly one tenth of our population, created about 10,000 more new jobs than America.
*
Yes, Canada's economic recovery is outpacing our own. In terms of sheer job creation, June saw Canada create jobs at a pace that was five times the rate predicted by economists, Bloomberg News reports. Canada added 93,200 jobs in June, while U.S. private employers added just 83,000.
*
Thanks to strong hiring in the service sector, Canada's unemployment rate fell to 7.9 from 8.1 percent, while America's unemployment rate came in at 9.5 percent in June, falling only because of a large exodus of Americans looking for work.
*
Canadian real estate broker Royal LePage predicts Canada's home prices could rise an average of 6.8 percent in 2010. Meanwhile, the IMF, though remaining relatively upbeat on the U.S. housing and job markets, warned that the foreclosure crisis could lead to a double-dip in home prices.
*
With gay marriage rights - British Columbia was one of the first provinces to approve gay marriage - and a far more robust economy and tolerant society, Canada has far more to offer LGBT Americans that does the USA where religious based discrimination - even though unconstitutional under a straight forward reading of the Constitution - remains the norm in the majority of states.

More American Expatriates Give Up Citizenship

The New York Times has a story that ought to cause concerns in Washington. Americans living and working overseas are beginning to increasingly renounce their citizenship because of double taxation issues and the fact that they are treated as would be terrorists in their financial dealings. And the story does not even get into the issue of LGBT Americans who are moving overseas so that they can be together with their partners who may be unable to remain in the USA. One would think that keeping hard working citizens would be a priority for the U.S. government, but it seems that such is not the case. Not only is the USA no longer the true land of the free where religious freedom is truly afforded to all citizens, but now its expatriates are getting screwed financially as well. Frankly, as third class citizens in Virginia (second class in the nation as a whole) the boyfriend and I have no strong compunction to remain in America once our elderly parents pass. Indeed, my children for the most part likewise recognize that the USA is a fraud in terms of legal equality for all. Citizenship is a two way street and not just about what citizens can do for a country, but also about what a country gives back to its citizens. Here are some story highlights:
*
Amid mounting frustration over taxation and banking problems, small but growing numbers of overseas Americans are taking the weighty step of renouncing their citizenship.
*
“What we have seen is a substantial change in mentality among the overseas community in the past two years,” said Jackie Bugnion, director of American Citizens Abroad, an advocacy group based in Geneva. “Before, no one would dare mention to other Americans that they were even thinking of renouncing their U.S. nationality. Now, it is an openly discussed issue.”
*
Anecdotally, frustrations over tax and banking questions, not political considerations, appear to be the main drivers of the surge. Expat advocates say that as it becomes more difficult for Americans to live and work abroad, it will become harder for American companies to compete.
*
American expats have long complained that the United States is the only industrialized country to tax citizens on income earned abroad, even when they are taxed in their country of residence, though they are allowed to exclude their first $91,400 in foreign-earned income.
*
Some U.S.-based banks have closed expats’ accounts because of difficulty in certifying that the holders still maintain U.S. addresses, as required by a Patriot Act provision. “It seems the new anti-terrorist rules are having unintended effects,” Daniel Flynn, who lives in Belgium, wrote in a letter quoted by the Americans Abroad Caucus in the U.S. Congress in correspondence with the Treasury Department.
*
Kathleen Rittenhouse, who lives in Canada, wrote that until she encountered a similar problem, “I did not know that the Patriot Act placed me in the same category as terrorists, arms dealers and money launderers.”
*
Relinquishing citizenship is relatively simple. The person must appear before a U.S. consular or diplomatic official in a foreign country and sign a renunciation oath. This does not allow a person to escape old tax bills or military obligations. Now, expats’ representatives fear renunciations will become more common. “It is a sad outcome,” Ms. Bugnion said, “but I personally feel that we are now seeing only the tip of the iceberg.”

The Unhinged Alternate Universe of the "Birthers"

Just the other day I indicated that CNN had directed Lou Dobbs to cease the coverage of the "Obama is an alien myth" circulating among the delusional elements of the GOP and the far right Christianists. Now, FactCheck.org is reporting that its staff has seen the real, original birth certificate issued by Hawaii - which last I looked was a state within the USA and before that a U.S. territory. Will this be enough to put an end to the "birther" insanity? Most likely not because we are dealing with folks who have no tether to objective reality. In short, they are insane and literally nothing can convince them that their beliefs - likely based on racial bigotry and prejudice - are not true. I hope the mainstream media will run with this proof and help expose the insanity of the far right and even some members of Congress who knowingly prostitute themselves to the birthers. Here are some highlights from FactCheck.org:

*
In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."
*
We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.