Happy Halloween. Wishing you all a festive, fun and safe Halloween…. Some photos from this past weekend’s Halloween Party here… Below, I just took up sewing again, here is my latest fabric, in honor of my Mexican heritage and Dia de los Muertos.

Advertisements

When the GOP Presidential candidates stops talking about the economy, Barrack Obama gets closer to victory in 2012. That is why it’s disheartening to see the Republican presidential candidates focus more and more on illegal immigration. Politico’s Morning Score reports:

“ROMNEY TO BLAST PERRY ON IMMIGRATION-PREVIEW: The Romney camp knows that continuing to hit Perry’s Texas immigration record is a real winner for them. So as Perry returns, they plan to ratchet up criticisms. A release going out later highlights Boston’s favorite 60% statistic: “Over the past decade, the number of illegal immigrants in Texas is estimated to have grown by 60%,” spokesman Ryan Williams says in a forthcoming release, shared exclusively with Score. “Governor Perry should explain to the people of New Hampshire why he thinks their opposition to his liberal immigration policies means they ‘don’t have a heart.'”

Herman Cain made news with his statements on an electrified border fence. (He later said he was just joking.) News reports state Perry will continue to attack Mitt Romney on illegal immigration and RomneyCare.

Many feel the Republican Party has a strong opportunity to win over Latino voters who are disappointed with President Obama and the failed economy. Yet, the GOP’s renewed focus on immigration might derail any chance to attract Hispanic voters and win in 2012.

Last week, CNN reported that Democrats in Congress are considering bringing up immigration reform legislation before the end of the year. The purpose is not to pass a bill, but make immigration a political wedge issue, and make the Republican Party seem unwelcoming to immigrants and therefore Latinos.


Marco Rubio, the freshman U.S. Senator from Florida, has been in the political spotlight since his stunning victory in the 2010-midterm elections. Supported by Tea Party activists, independents and Hispanics voters, his crossover appeal caught the eyes of national media. In recent days, the Cuban-American Rubio has been attacked on all sides, for not being Cuban-Exile enough, American-enough and Latino-enough. It’s a ridiculous and shameful assault, which many feel is an attempt to tarnish the career of a promising Hispanic Republican.

This week the attacks on Rubio continue as the media hunts for tabloid stories on the rising Republican star, often mentioned as a potential 2012 Vice Presidential candidate.  As reporters and pundits are hungry for new angles in their 2012 election coverage, they’ve sharpened their attacks on Rubio, alluding that he isn’t Hispanic enough to connect with Hispanic voters. Their analysis is an over simplification, at best, of the often-complicated Latino vote.

Senator Rubio has repeatedly stated he is solely focused on being the U.S. Senator from Florida and currently has no interest in higher office.  He won his senate seat with a strong majority of Latino voters across demographic and political lines.

In Florida, where Hispanic Democrats outnumber Hispanic Republicans by 105,000 voters, Marco Rubio won 55 percent of the Hispanic vote. He won the support of 40 percent of non-Cuban Latinos in the three-way race against a popular Democrat, Kendrick Meek, and an independent candidate, the sitting Florida Governor Charlie Crist.  A Latino Decisions Poll shows that Rubio won as much as 62% of the Hispanic vote.

Rubio helped the Florida GOP appeal to Latino voters in 2010. Only two years before, Barack Obama
won 57 percent of the Latino vote in Florida in 2008. Even now, a recent Resurgent Republic poll shows

I am often boggled by people who fantasize about living in a socialist country. They talk about socialism, their idea of a perfect utopian society, as if it was a successful model of government. They think of Cuba’s failed system as a “success.”

At a recent Occupy Wall Street rally in New York a former citizen of the Soviet Union confronts two OWS protestors who are advocating socialism and Che Guevara. Watch:

I wonder if this woman, and the millions of liberals who support Che, know that their favorite Communist presided over the Cuban Revolution’s first firing squad and approve the murder of thousands more. Che founded Cuba’s labor camp system, which eventually  incarcerate and tortured gays, dissidents, and AIDS victims.

Thank you to Eyes On Freedom and Verum Serum  for the video. Read more about the real Che Guevara from author Humberto Fontova – http://www.hfontova.com/che.html

As the election gets closer, and more and more politicos ponder the Latino vote, I wanted to re-post a blog I did a few weeks ago asking: Which GOP candidate will win the Latino voteThe hard reality for all Presidential candidates is that all roads to the White House depend on Latino support. For a Republican to win the general election, they will need about 40% of the Hispanic vote. In the hunt to secure key votes in swing states, candidates will need to woo Latinos who makeup major voting constituencies in battle ground states like New Mexico, Nevada, Florida… 

As we move into the final days of 2011 and into the full sprint of the GOP Primary season, here are some thoughts for my Republican colleagues:

Keys to Winning Hispanic Voters:

For the GOP to connect with Hispanics the Republican candidates must understand three key things:

1) Latinos are not a monolithic voting bloc and like all things in campaigns, politics is local. Hispanics in Florida are different from Latinos in Nevada.

2) Don’t change your message, but be culturally relevant and consistent. The last things Latinos want is a slick pandering politician that says one thing in English and another thing in Spanish. (P.S. most Latinos are bilingual.) Candidates must

I shared my thoughts on the Marco Rubio story with my friend and fellow blogger Melissa Clouthier. She always offers great insight and a wonderful resource. Follow her on twitter or on her blog at http://melissablogs.com.

Marco Rubio: American. Exiled Cuban.

October 21, 2011 / 6:22 pm • By Dr. Melissa Clouthier

Marco Rubio punched back against the defamatory Washington Post piece. Liberals are loving it because Marco Rubio — an ardently pro-American Senator of Cuban descent can not only lead, but he can give a speech, too — scares them to death. More here.

Articulate minority? Why, he should be a Democrat. How dare he be uppity? Since he isn’t, it’s a mission to destroy him as a person.

A friend of mine, Bettina Inclan, also of Cuban descent was incensed at the hit and said this privately and I asked if I could share her thoughts. Here’s what she said:

“I am beyond disappointed by the Washington Post and their attack piece on Marco Rubio and his family’s history fleeing Cuba’s political turmoil. I keep wondering why they deiced to run this piece now? Is it for the financial gain of article’s author Manuel Roig-Franzia who has an upcoming unauthorized biography on Rubio?

I’m not sure what to be more upset about, Washington Post’s sloppy reporting, their total lack of understanding of the Cuban exile experience, how they conveniently ignore Cuban history or their veiled attempt to try to bruise Marco Rubio, a rising Hispanic Republican star ….

My grandfather suffered for 13 plus years in a Cuban prison because he refused to become a Communist. His experience as a political prisoner and my family’s flight for freedom in America has shaped my political beliefs. My story is similar to thousands of Cuban-Americans whose family history might be slightly different, yet their pain is very much the same.

In an exclusive editorial to POLITICO Marco Rubio takes on the Washington Post and defends his family’s history:

My Family’s Flight From Castro
By Senator Marco Rubio

The Washington Post on Friday accused me of seeking political advantage by embellishing the story of how my parents arrived in the United States.

That is an outrageous allegation that is not only incorrect, but an insult to the sacrifices my parents made to provide a better life for their children. They claim I did this because “being connected to the post-revolution exile community gives a politician cachet that could never be achieved by someone identified with the pre-Castro exodus, a group sometimes viewed with suspicion.”

If The Washington Post wants to criticize me for getting a few dates wrong, I accept that. But to call into question the central and defining event of my parents’ young lives – the fact that a brutal communist dictator took control of their homeland and they were never able to return – is something I will not tolerate.

My understanding of my parents’ journey has always been based on what they told me about events that took place more than 50 years ago — more than a decade before I was born. What they described was not a timeline, or specific dates.

They talked about their desire to find a better life, and the pain of being separated from the nation of their birth. What they described was the struggle they faced growing up, and their obsession with giving their children the chance to do the things they never could.

But the Post story misses the point completely. The real essence of my family’s story is not about the date my parents first entered the United States. Or whether they traveled back and forth between the two nations. Or even the date they left Fidel Castro’s Cuba forever and permanently settled here.

The essence of my family story is why they came to America in the first place; and why they had to stay.

I now know that they entered the U.S. legally on an immigration visa in May of 1956. Not, as some have said before, as part of some special privilege reserved only for Cubans. They came because they wanted to achieve things they could not achieve in their native land.

And they stayed because, after January 1959, the Cuba they knew disappeared. They wanted to go back — and in fact they did. Like many Cubans, they initially held out hope that Castro’s revolution would bring about positive change. So after 1959, they traveled back several times — to assess the prospect of returning home.

In February 1961, my mother took my older siblings to Cuba with the intention of moving back. My father was wrapping up family matters in Miami and was set to join them.

But after just a few weeks, it became clear that the change happening in Cuba was not for the better. It was communism. So in late March 1961, just weeks before the Bay of Pigs invasion, my mother and siblings left Cuba and my family settled permanently in the United States.

Soon after, Castro officially declared Cuba a Marxist state. My family has never been able to return.

I am the son of immigrants and exiles, raised by people who know all too well that you can lose your country. By people who know firsthand that America is a very special place….

Continue reading the story at POLITICO: