Will the “Patriots” Boycott Bread if They Found Out a Mexican Company Is the USA’s Largest Baker?

Post to Twitter

Those Mexicans.

They steal our jobs.

And bake our breads.

Very few Americans, and we would venture to guess that none of those "patriots" who think that this country is being "taken over" by Mexicans, would even know that this country's largest baker is in fact a Mexican multinational.

Yes, meet Bimbo Bakeries USA, a division of Grupo Bimbo, a Mexican company that was established in 1945. It is the fourth largest food company in the world, and its US division is the country's largest baker. Oh yeah, Bimbo (yes, we still giggle with the name "bimbo," but that is not the point here) also sponsors the US Olympic team.

Here are just a sample of the brands that Grupo Bimbo's US division owns: 

  • Entenmann's
  • Thomas' (yes, those famous English muffins)
  • Boboli pizza
  • Arnold's
  • Brownberry
  • Oroweat
  • Freihofer's
  • Stroehmann
  • Sara Lee (yes, flipping Sara Lee)

Soccer fans in North America also know Bimbo as the major sponsor of clubs such as Monterrey, Chivas, América, and MLS' Philadelphia Union.

So the next time you toast your English muffin or eat a Boboli, just remember that they are all part of a global company founded in Mexico. Yeah, Mexicans aren't stealing our jobs at all. They are actually creating jobs, around 15,000 US employees.

Suck it, nativists. The Reconquista has already happened and it started at your local bakery aisle. Unless of course, you don't eat bread, pizza or doughnuts. Which would be so unAmerican we would shudder at the thought.

Post to Twitter

Rest in Peace, Carlos Fuentes: Video From One of His Last Interviews

Post to Twitter

We are still absorbing the news of the death Mexico's Carlos Fuentes, one of the greatest writers and literary figures of our time.

We plan to write more about what Fuentes meant to us in the next coming days, but right now we will share an interview Fuentes gave to CBC from late last year. He was a truth seeker until the day he died.

Post to Twitter

VIDEO: DOJ’s Complete Unedited Press Conference Announcing United States vs. Arpaio

Post to Twitter

Here is the full united video from the May 10, 2012 United States Department's press conference detailing its lawsuit against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office and Arpaio are being sued for alleged acts of racial profiling, specifically among US citizens of Latino descent, and for unconstitutional law enforcement practices.

"The police are supposed to protect and serve our communities, not divide them."

Thomas Perez, US DOJ

 

Post to Twitter

In United States vs. Joe Arpaio, Controversial Sheriff Says He Is Being Used for the Latino Vote

Post to Twitter

What follows below are the entire public documents describing in full detail the lawsuit filed this week by the United States government against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Arpaio has already gone on record to say the following, as reported by CNN:

"They're using me for the Latino vote, showing that they're doing something, taking on the sheriff over an alleged racial profiling," Joe Arpaio told reporters in Phoenix. He vowed to defend himself, not for selfish purposes, but to help the thousands of other sheriffs in the country avoid finding themselves in similar situations.

"I'm not going to surrender my office to the federal government," he said. "I will fight this to the bitter end."

 

Post to Twitter

From “Democracy Now!”: The U.S. v. Joe Arpaio

Post to Twitter

Democracy Now! provided as rather extensive and detailed report about the recent suit filed by the US Department of Justice against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose office has been charged with racially profiling Latino residents in the Phoenix area. Here is the video of the segment and the transcript from today's segment.

 

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We begin today’s show in Arizona. On Thursday, the Justice Department sued Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his deputies in Maricopa County for racially profiling Latino residents in the Phoenix area. The Justice Department filed a lawsuit only once before in the 18-year history of its police reform work.

The 32-page complaint contends that Arpaio and his deputies aggressively targeted Latinos regardless of their immigration status and retaliated against anyone who got in their way. According to the complaint, Latinos at the county jail were often referred to as "wetbacks" and other ethnic slurs. The complaint also alleges Latino drivers were five to nine times more likely than their non-Latino counterparts to be stopped or searched.

Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division announced the lawsuit.

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL THOMAS PEREZ: The police are supposed to protect and serve our communities, not divide them. At its core, this is an abuse-of-power case involving a sheriff and a sheriff’s office that disregarded the Constitution, ignored sound police practices, compromised public safety, and did not hesitate to retaliate against perceived critics. Constitutional policing and effective policing go hand in hand. Our complaint alleges the defendants’ actions were neither constitutional nor effective.

AMY GOODMAN: Sheriff Joe Arpaio vowed to fight the lawsuit. He said he’ll defend himself to help other sheriffs avoid finding themselves in similar situations.

SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO: We’re just doing our job, enforcing the illegal immigration laws. We are not racist. We do not racial-profile. There’s no systemic proof of that. And quite frankly, I’m very happy that we are being sued, because now we will make them put up everything they’ve been accusing me and my office of. The bottom line here, as my attorneys mentioned, I am not going to surrender my office to the federal government. I will fight this to the bitter end.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Supporters of Sheriff Joe Arpaio maintain that the federal government has failed to police the southwestern border, leading to an influx of undocumented immigrants who have allegedly drained social services and created other problems. Sheriff Joe Arpaio has also told reporters in Phoenix, quote, "They’re using me for the Latino vote, showing that they’re doing something, taking on the sheriff over an alleged racial profiling."

AMY GOODMAN: A Department of Justice probe last year accused Arpaio of targeting Latino residents, illegally detaining them, then denying them basic rights behind bars. Settlement talks between Arpaio and federal officials broke down last month over Arpaio’s resistance to allowing an independent monitor of his department.

For more, we’re going to Phoenix, Arizona, where we’re joined by Randy Parraz, a longtime critic of Sheriff Arpaio, president of Citizens for a Better Arizona, the group that led a successful recall effort against Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, the leading lawmaker behind Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, SB 1070.

Randy Parraz, welcome to Democracy Now! Talk about the significance of this case.

RANDY PARRAZ: Good morning.

Yes, I think it’s very important, because now the case has moved forward, and there’s an actual lawsuit. Sheriff Arpaio, with his recent release of a reform document, is actually admitting that there’s problems there. Now, he’s been in denial for quite some time. You know, he thinks this is a fight or some type of war against the federal government. You know, this is not United Counties of Arizona; we are in the United States of America. The federal government, under the Department of Justice, an investigation began under the George Bush administration, that continued. These are seasoned professionals in the civil rights department who are doing their job. And so, it’s unfortunate that Sheriff Arpaio chooses to whip up, you know, his political machine, instead of come to the table and just deal with these issues.

I was someone who was targeted by sheriff deputies and arrested back in 2008 for speaking out against Sheriff Arpaio. These are real instances. There are other U.S. citizens who have been stopped, detained and arrested. These are real instances. Sheriff Arpaio is in La-La Land. He is a relic from the past, and he needs to come to terms with his behavior that he’s actually created and the culture of corruption he’s created there in the sheriff’s department.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Randy, the complaint by the Justice Department not only centers on the actual practices of the department in terms of these roundups in neighborhoods, surrounding whole neighborhoods and stopping everyone and demanding identification from everyone in these neighborhoods, but also talks about the emails that went back and forth between members of the department, these outrageously racist emails. Could you talk about that, what you know of in terms of the operations of the department?

RANDY PARRAZ: Yes. I mean, it’s just a culture that was created there where they thought it was OK as being sheriff deputies, high-ranking commanders, supervisors, when you have things going around referring to Mexicans as "Mexican bitches," using cartoons and talking about—you know, showing a drunk Mexican on a bench, you know, saying that that’s their form of yoga. I mean, there was just, time after time, different instances where they felt comfortable, you know, vilifying, making fun of a community of people who are Latinos, based on the culture that Sheriff Arpaio has created there.

And so, we believe, finally, we’re going to have an airing of what’s taken place. You know, we applaud the federal government and the Department of Justice for coming in and holding Sheriff Arpaio accountable, because local law enforcement officials here, whether it’s the county attorney, Bill Montgomery, or it’s the state attorney general, Tom Horne, are unwilling to do that work. We just recently had—you know, yesterday marked the day that former County Attorney Thomas, Andrew Thomas, was officially disbarred for his behavior, for what he did here in Maricopa County, and he was also in partnership with Sheriff Arpaio. So Sheriff Arpaio’s former chief deputy, David Hendershott: fired. You know, former County Attorney Andrew Thomas: disbarred. You know, Russell Pearce: recalled. And now you have Sheriff Arpaio, like the only remaining pillar of that triangle of corruption, that remains.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But Randy, this also—this lawsuit—or this complaint now also sort of sets the Justice Department, in some way, up against the Department of Homeland Security, because Janet Napolitano, who is from Arizona, has never really called out Joe Arpaio on any of the—of his activities or any of his practices.

RANDY PARRAZ: I think, absolutely. I think Janet Napolitano at one point actually sought Sheriff Arpaio’s endorsement when she ran for governor, so I think you’re touching on some really interesting points there in terms of, you know, who’s really going to lead this effort and who’s willing to speak out and really hold these folks accountable. I think you have this investigation, which we—especially folks who live here under this corrupt, you know, regime, this reign of terror, and it’s real. They talk about wall of distrust that exists between the sheriff’s department and the Latino community, and that’s very real.

AMY GOODMAN: Randy?

RANDY PARRAZ: So, I don’t think—yes.

AMY GOODMAN: I also wanted to ask you about recent reports that Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio publicly mocked federal authorities probing his office for racially profiling of Latinos at a fundraiser for an anti-immigration group in Texas in 2009. Arpaio said, quote, "After they went after me, we arrested 500 more just for spite." Can you talk about this report, Randy Parraz?

RANDY PARRAZ: Yeah. Once again, it just shows that Sheriff Arpaio is more concerned about his own political image. He sees, you know, whether it’s Latino immigrants, as pawns in his own political game. There was a time here when Sheriff Arpaio—I think it was in 2006—was on record saying, "I’m not concerned about those immigrants or those folks who are here, you know, selling elote, corn vendors, those types of folks. I want to go after real criminals, those smugglers, those folks who are bringing drugs in." And then that changed in 2006, 2007, when he thought it was in his political interest to get on the bandwagon and do immigrant bashing and going after those immigrants and playing that card.

And so, now I think he’s overplayed it. I think now people are fatigued about this whole notion, where he has, you know, illegally misspent over $100 million. There’s been—there’s over 400 uninvestigated sex crimes that took place under his watch. He’s moved a tremendous amount of our resources and put it under other priority by going after, you know, immigrants. And so, I think, you know, we’re at a point now where this is all going to come to a head, because his election now is up in November. And so, whether, you know, we see it—we get justice in the courtroom for the civil action being brought by the Department of Justice or get justice at the ballot box, this is all going to come down this year. So it’s going to be a very exciting year for trying to get Arizona back on the right direction for progress here in Arizona.

AMY GOODMAN: Randy Parraz, I want to thank you very much for being with us, president of Citizens for a Better Arizona. The group led a successful recall effort against State Senator Russell Pearce, the leading lawmaker behind the anti-immigrant bill, SB 1070. Now, well, it’s the U.S. Justice Department that’s taking on the sheriff, U.S.A. v. Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Post to Twitter

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu Quits Congressional Race to Run for Re-Election as Sheriff

Post to Twitter

In a letter to supporters published today on his web site, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu, a controversial face of immigration enforcement  who experienced a scandal earlier this year where he allegedly threatened his undocumented Mexican ex-lover with deportation, announced that he was quitting his campaign for Arizona's 4th Congressional district in the US House of Representatives and instead running for re-election as sheriff of his county.

Earlier this year, Sheriff Babeu faced allegations that he threatened his undocumented Mexican ex-lover with deportation.

This is what he wrote in a letter entitled "Seeking re-election as Pinal County Sheriff:"

First, let me say how much your friendship and support means to me. When I announced my candidacy for Congress, I promised the citizens of Pinal County that I would ensure continuity of leadership in the Sheriff’s Office. Chief Deputy Steve Henry’s candidacy not only ensured continuity of leadership, it also safeguarded the improved service we’ve delivered to Pinal families with the same passion and commitment since taking office. 

The federal Office of Special Counsel has advised Chief Henry that because our office receives federal funds and Steve supervises those who are in control of federal funds, he is not able to run for Sheriff while serving as our Chief Deputy.

Chief Henry was left three choices, resign his position as Chief Deputy and run for Sheriff, withdraw his candidacy for Sheriff or transfer to a non-leadership position within our office where he would not supervise anybody who handles any federal funding. Forget the politics, none of these options are good to maintain continued success of our Sheriff’s Office. I have decided to end our congressional campaign and seek re-election as Pinal County Sheriff. Yesterday, I informed my campaign staff and our finance team of my decision to run for re-election.

Post to Twitter

Former California Governor Pete Wilson Chosen as a Romney Delegate to Republican National Convention

Post to Twitter

Pete Wilson? Really?

As the GOP and the Republican National Committee struggle to change Mitt Romney's extreme immigration stances that he employed during the primary season, the Sacramento Bee reported today that former California governor Pete Wilson, perhaps one of the most infamous anti-immigrant leaders of the last two decades (hello, Prop 187), has been named a Romney delegate for the national Republican convention. He just a list of Californians who are a who's who of the GOP, including former gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman.

Such an announcement already got the compulsory tweet from Obama 2012 Latino media director Gabriela Domenzain:

Domenzain followed up her English tweet with one in Spanish, just to make sure the word got out:

Who can blame her? Sure Obama has his issues with the Latino vote, but still, it's Pete Flipping Wilson, another of Romney's sorry immigration draft choices. As the Latino vote continues to be important in key swing states like Nevada, Florida, Colorado, New Mexico and other states, any Romney association with Wilson will be quickly shared. Wilson is the padrino of the anti-immigrant bloc of the GOP.

So, Romney really is softening his stance on immigration? ¿De veras? #NoMames, Mitt.

Post to Twitter

Nice Try, New Jersey: Court Says Landlords Under No Legal Obligation to Inquire About Immigration Status

Post to Twitter

From Juan Cartagena, President and General Counsel LatinoJustice PRLDEF

 

Immigration policy is a complex web of competing local interests and national norms that has seen its share of debate in New Jersey in recent years.  As the federal administration struggles to pass comprehensive immigration reform some New Jersey governmental units have impatiently jumped into the fray to either limit routine work encounters by day laborers (Freehold), expand the workload of local law enforcement to include immigration enforcement (Morristown) or delineate the appropriateness of referrals to immigration authorities (NJ Attorney General’s Office).  As important as work, and education, public safety and health, is to the state’s immigrant  community, no area of daily life is as tied to presence in this country as is housing.  Regulating the housing market by definition regulates the presence of immigrants.  And on that score, New Jersey recently added an important chapter to the protection of the civil rights of Latino and immigrant households in a federal court decision last month.

A landlord in Plainfield was sued in a novel application of federal racketeering laws by one its tenants who alleged that the landlord rented apartments disregarding a prospective tenant’s immigration status, knowingly soliciting undocumented immigrants for rentals and accepting flawed documentation as to their lawful immigration status.  By refusing to investigate the lawfulness of its tenants’ presence in this country, the landlord allegedly harbored undocumented persons in Plainfield and induced others to come to this country illegally.  And all of it, presumably, as an illegal racketeering enterprise under the RICO laws. 

The case, Bolmer v. Connelly, was unprecedented, and if victorious would have completely altered landlord – tenant relations.  Landlords would become immigration agents and forced to navigate the intricacies of immigration law to determine who is lawfully present – and if they got it wrong, criminal penalties would follow.  Tenants would be subject to increased housing discrimination and potential homelessness with a disproportionate number of Latinos, lawful permanent residents and citizens alike, all subject to the worse aspects of attempting to import complex immigration expertise to untrained realty owners in the private sector.

LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the organization I direct, welcomed the opportunity to address the court to support the landlord and halt this misguided attempt to decentralize immigration enforcement of what is essentially a national issue.  Our client was the Latin American Coalition, a nonprofit organization in Plainfield whose members include tenants, residents and property owners in the city and whose mission is to provide social services to Latinos in the area.  Before the final arguments were made to the federal court the defendant landlord was unable to participate after initiating bankruptcy proceedings and the court invited our team of attorneys to take the lead on the defense.  We prepared our arguments and with the help of a local law firm, Duane Morris, presented a vigorous defense to stop the extension of racketeering laws to routine landlord – tenant encounters.  Last month we were vindicated when Judge Julio Fuentes of the U.S. Court of Appeals wrote an opinion recognizing that renting is not harboring in the criminal sense and dismissed the RICO claims.

Often lost in the immigration debates at the state level is that Congress has declined to establish criminal sanctions related to the mere presence of unauthorized persons in the country.  A corollary to this scheme is that the Executive Branch frequently exercises its discretion not to remove persons who may lack lawful immigration status for a host of economic and humanitarian reasons.  It was in this context that the lawsuit filed against Plainfield New Jersey property owners was lodged as part of a concerted effort to push the courts to make it difficult for New Jersey’s immigrants to assimilate into the social fabric through lawful means.  The plaintiffs in Bolmer were represented by Deasey, Mahoney & Valentini, a law firm that unsuccessfully represented the City of Hazelton, Pennsylvania in support of its anti-immigrant ordinance against day laborers and tenants in that town. The Immigration Reform Law Institute also lent its support to the case and the Institute is tied to the Federation of American Immigration Reform, founded in the 1980s by John Tanton who has funding ties to modern day eugenics movement.

Thus Plainfield was caught in the middle of a unsavory national effort to localize immigration enforcement when the only sane and rational response to immigration in our ever increasing flat world of globalization is a national, federal response.  Luckily for New Jersey’s Latino communities the federal courts stepped in and stopped what would have been a major housing crisis in the Garden State.

To learn more about LatinoJustice PRLDEF, visit the organzation here.

Post to Twitter

Secure Communities Program Expands to Massachusetts, Despite Objections by Governor Patrick

Post to Twitter

For those who think that the immigration issue applies only to border states, yesterday the federal government announced that the secure communities program, which targets undocumented individuals (specifically those with criminal records), will expand into Massachusetts on May 15, according to The Boston Globe.

From: http://s-comm-nj.blogspot.com/

The article said that the announcement caught state officials by surprise, since the original plan was to launch the program by the end of 2013. Governor Duval Patrick, a Democrat and a surrogate to President Obama's 2012 campaign, has consistently said that such a program is discriminatory and unfairly locates undocumented immigrants with no criminal record.

This is what Governor Patrick said last year:

"I'm persuaded that here in the commonwealth, we will give up more than we get. We run a serious risk of ethnic profiling and frankly fracturing incredibly important relationships in communities that are necessary for law enforcement."

Now let's get this straight: most people (including us) agree that people who committed serious crimes should indeed be arrested and if they have immigration issues, they deportation is an option. However, the secure communities program has quickly become yet another symbol of anti-immigrant hate, as well as it being anti-Latino. On Boston radio today, many callers were supporting the program because this is all about "those illegals taking our jobs" and "using our services." The fact is that the immigration issue is complex (for example, economic need for cheap labor, those jobs that Americans can apply for, but they decide not to) and by creating a wider net, there is the risk that if you don't speak English or "look different," you will get checked about your immigration status. This is how it started in Germany, people, whether you agree with that or not, check your history.

But that won't stop the neo-nativists, who quite frankly, have become an influential voice in the Republican Party. That is why Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown (R) was quick to comment about the expansion of the program into his state. According the to Globe, Brown said the program is "an important tool in keeping our citizens safe and giving our law enforcement officials, especially the sheriffs, the tools and resources they need to do their jobs."

"The people of Massachusetts will finally have the protection they deserve from violent criminals who have entered our country illegally."

The fact is that this is all about ONE high-profile case in Massachusetts: the death of 23-year-old Matthew Denice, who was killed by Nicolás Guaman when Guaman's pickup truck struck Denice's motorcycle. Now there is an "illegal alien criminal" problem in Massachusetts, and Massachusetts residents are being hounded by the "illegal criminal" menace. We do wonder if Sen. Brown feels the same way about the US Border Patrol's killing of Anastasio Rojas? We doubt it.

In the end, Worcester County Sheriff Lew Evangelidis, whose office investigated Denice's death, had vowed to bring the secure communities law to Massachusetts:

"Following the tragic death of Matthew, I made a promise to his family that I would do everything in my power to bring this program to Massachusetts so that other families would not have to endure the pain they suffered."

One tragic crime and now Massachusetts has a controversial program being launched. Fear is alive and well.

Post to Twitter

From @MyCuentame: Are the Authors of SB1070 Writing an Alternative to the DREAM Act?

Post to Twitter

Originally Posted at Cuéntame

We are in the business of keeping both sides honest and want the best possible proposal for DREAMERS. Which is why we will check BOTH sides. Here, the connection between FAIR, CIS, and alternative proposals the to DREAM Act deserve to be checked.

Post to Twitter