Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
03-09-2013, 09:35 PM #1
Obama to nominate Thomas Perez as labor secretary
This is the way the MSM is portraying Tom Perez. They leave out his bias of supporting illegal aliens over US citizens and his obvious ethnic bias. JMO
Obama to nominate Thomas Perez as labor secretary
By Sari Horwitz and Lena H. Sun, Updated: Saturday, March 9,
Thomas E. Perez, the likely nominee to be the next secretary of labor, was introduced to organized labor under traumatic circumstances.
Perez was 12 when his father died of a heart attack, and a friend’s father stepped in as a surrogate. The man was a Teamster who’d lost his job, and the union helped support him.
Perez never forgot.
Now, Perez, 51, a first-generation Dominican American, is in line to lead the Department of Labor. President Obama plans to nominate Perez, assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights, to be labor secretary, according to two people in the administration familiar with the decision.
White House officials declined to comment on Perez or the nominating process.
Perez has strong labor support and served as Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s (D) labor secretary from 2007 until 2009, when he was tapped for the Justice Department position. Perez, a longtime Takoma Park resident, also served on the Montgomery County Council and was the first Latino elected to the council. He has been the key official under Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. handling civil rights cases, the centerpiece of what Holder hopes will be his legacy.
Reached by telephone Saturday, Perez said: “I can’t really discuss it, I apologize.”
Perez would replace Hilda L. Solis, who resigned in January. If nominated and confirmed, he would satisfy requests from Latino groups for representation in Obama’s second-term Cabinet.
Friends and colleagues say Perez has gained a unique perspective from working in federal, state and local government. “That is a very good range of experiences, a lot of perspective to see government at all those different angles,” said Ronald Weich, a former assistant attorney general for legislative affairs and now dean of the University of Baltimore’s law school.
But Perez’s possible nomination, which must be confirmed by the Senate, was already drawing criticism from one Republican lawmaker, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa). In a statement, Grassley said that if Perez is nominated, “he should face a lot of tough questions” about the Justice Department’s role in a decision last year by St. Paul, Minn., to withdraw a housing discrimination case that was before the Supreme Court.
On civil rights, Perez’s division oversaw voting rights cases against South Carolina and Texas. The Justice Department blocked a law in Texas last year that required voters to show a photo ID, following similar action in December 2011 to block a voter ID law in South Carolina. Both states filed lawsuits in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to overturn the federal action. The court struck down the Texas voter ID law and approved the South Carolina law, but ordered it delayed until at least this year.
The Civil Rights Division also conducted 17 probes of police and sheriff’s departments, the most in its 54-year history.
One of them involved America’s self-proclaimed toughest sheriff, Joe Arpaio of Arizona’s Maricopa County. The Justice department sued him, his office and the county last year for civil rights violations after months of negotiations failed to yield an agreement to settle allegations that his department racially profiled Latinos in immigration patrols.
Hilary O. Shelton, director of the Washington bureau of the NAACP, said Perez “has been one of the most irrepressible forces fighting for civil rights in decades.”
Perez has spent nearly his entire career in public service. After graduating from Harvard Law School, he clerked for a federal judge in Colorado and then worked as a prosecutor in the Civil Rights Division, handling some of the department’s most high-profile civil rights cases.
Weich, his Justice Department colleague, said he invited Perez to speak to law students recently. Asked to talk about his different jobs, Perez “spoke most passionately about his time in local government,” Weich said.
Perez once said he’d dreamed of elective office since his childhood in Buffalo, where he grew up as the youngest of five brothers and sisters.
He was teaching at the University of Maryland School of Law when he decided to run in the 2002 Democratic primary for the Montgomery council. He wooed Latino immigrants and other minorities in District 5, an increasingly diverse area spanning parts of Silver Spring, Kensington, Wheaton and Takoma Park, where Perez moved in 1995.
He became just the second minority ever to be elected to the nine-person council.
“He’s very passionate about what he believes in; he pushed his ideas very forcefully,” said Douglas M. Duncan, who was Montgomery County executive during Perez’s council stint.
Perez pushed a “bill of rights” for domestic workers, tried to toughen county laws against predatory lending and supported the expansion of medical clinics to serve the uninsured. He also fought to import cheaper prescription drugs for county employees — a plan blocked by the Food and Drug Administration.
In 2005, Perez became council president and the state’s highest-ranking Latino elected official. The following year, he entered the wide-open Democratic primary for Maryland attorney general. Labor unions and the state teachers association supported him, but he never made the ballot: The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the former federal prosecutor was ineligible because he lacked sufficient legal experience in the state.
“That was a really crushing experience for him,” recalled Rob Richie, a friend from Takoma Park. Richie, executive director of the voting reform group FairVote, said Perez could have gone into the private sector “to make a lot more money.”
But O’Malley appointed him Maryland’s secretary of labor, licensing and regulation. In that role, Perez pushed to protect employees from being incorrectly classified as independent contractors, a categorization that kept them from receiving unemployment insurance and workers compensation.
Fred D. Mason Jr., president of the Maryland and District of Columbia AFL-CIO, on Saturday called that Perez’s most important accomplishment in Annapolis.
“As a union leader, I certainly believe that labor rights and workers’ rights are also civil rights, and Tom has an appreciation for that,” said Mason, who represents about 350,000 workers.
Duncan, the former county executive, called Perez “a fierce advocate of labor.” He was also extremely loyal to O’Malley, Duncan said, recalling that Perez surprised some of his liberal allies by supporting the governor’s proposal to legalize slot-machine gambling in Maryland.
“He is someone who understands the plight of people in different positions,” said Isiah Leggett, the Montgomery county executive and former council member. “He also has the ability to bring practical and intellectual honesty to issues. You often don’t find that caliber of person who has served at the local level.”
When Leggett, the only African American ever elected to the county council, announced his campaign for county executive, Perez was among the first to endorse him.
O’Malley administration officials declined to comment on rumors that Perez might be Obama’s choice to head the Labor Department.
Perez received his undergraduate degree from Brown University in 1983, and four years later received law and public policy degrees from Harvard University. His wife, Ann Marie Staudenmaier, is an attorney with the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless.
J. Freedom du Lac, Philip Rucker and Michael Fletcher contributed to this report.
Discuss this topic and other political issues in the politics discussion forums.
03-09-2013, 09:38 PM #2
More on Perez and the New Black Panther Party.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 14, 2010
The Saga of the Tom Perez Nomination
Richard Faulknor at Blue Ridge Forum and Ann Corcoran at the Potomac Tea Party Report have raised issues about the fitness of Tom Perez to be Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division given his dubious association with CASA de Maryland. Mr. Perez's involvement in the decision by the Civil Rights Division to not press for civil or criminal sanctions against the antics of King Samir Shabazz, of "kill some cracker babies" fame, and the New Black Panther Party is inexplicable and now the subject of an investigation by the US Civil Rights Commission, and hopefully by Darrell Issa when he assumes chairmanship of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
They also raise the issue about the role of two prominent Marylanders in Mr. Perez's confirmation: Mr. John Kane, former Maryland GOP Chair and husband of Bob Ehrlich's running mate Mary Kane, and House Minority Leader Tony O'Donnell. To me these are separate cases.
John Kane, when he wrote his letter of support, was a private citizen. He had no official capacity and his letter should not be used as a reason to impute his views to his wife and it certainly did not have the endorsement of the Maryland GOP. I understand that Mr. Kane and Mr. Perez are personal friends and from that view point I understand his support.
The case of Minority Leader O'Donnell is much more troubling. His letter is hardly a rousing endorsement and may be considered a professional courtesy to a former colleague who had, by all accounts, a reputation for collegiality. Regardless of his professional or personal relationship with Mr. Perez, Mr. O'Donnell had a duty to evaluate what he knew of Mr. Perez's history with CASA de Maryland -- or, alternatively, discover that history if he wasn't familiar with it -- before giving his endorsement. CASA de Maryland's history of flouting US immigration laws should, in my view, have been a more than adequate reason for Mr. O'Donnell to refuse his endorsement as those actions speak volumes for the policies Mr. Perez would... and has... pursued at the Department of Justice.
This kind of go-along-get-along, log-rolling, mutual back scratching is what has relegated the Maryland GOP to a virtual joke. Our leaders suffer from some variety of the Stockholm Syndrome where they sympathize with and curry the favor of people who will neither like nor respect them. Ever. In the process they demoralize activists, discourage the base, and continue to rule in their own tiny ghetto.
This behavior has to stop.
Red Maryland: The Saga of the Tom Perez Nomination
03-09-2013, 09:46 PM #3
September 13, 2010
Thomas Perez: Obama's one-man Gestapo
By Wes Vernon
If you tried to help a "protected" Obama constituency, you had better hope that your best efforts didn't fail. The Gestapo will have you in its crosshairs.
This is not the Gestapo of the thirties-Germany variety so vividly portrayed by Hollywood long after the bright shiny black uniforms and man-sized flashlights of the SS became extinct and irrelevant.
Tom Perez — control freak
Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General, heads the Justice Department's (DOJ) "Civil Rights" division. On September 3, the department filed a suit against "America's toughest sheriff" Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona. The reason? The sheriff is actually (gasp!) enforcing the immigration laws that DOJ is supposed to uphold.
Perez's minions — sans black uniforms and man-sized flashlights (this is an"American" Gestapo, after all) — have "raided" Sheriff Arpaio's office, falsely charging his operation with "discrimination."
They can't prove that — especially since another federal agency — the Immigration Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) had previously conducted its own probe of Sheriff Arpaio's office and found his officers "to be professional and meeting the requirement of the MOA" (Memorandum of Understanding). That included discrimination and racial profiling issues in dealing with illegal immigrants. That report from Byron York, who smoked out the ICE finding for the Washington Examiner.
So Perez's staffers — apparently charged with unearthing a "spitting on the street" violation if necessary — added the vaguely-worded catch-all charge: refusing to cooperate fully with investigators.
The outwardly "polite" gendarmes working for Perez admit they already have thousands of pages of documents they requested. Moreover, they were granted access to the sheriff's staff.
"They smiled in our faces then stabbed us in the back with this lawsuit," Arpaio told the Washington Times. "Now it's time to take the gloves off."
The Mexican Drug Cartel has placed a one-million dollar bounty on Sheriff Arpaio's head. There have been numerous death threats and actual plots against him, some resulting in convictions. The city of Phoenix (the county seat) is now number one in home invasions and kidnappings.
The criminals want to get rid of the sheriff via bullets. The Obama administration wants him out of there via ballots. That's the real reason they're aiming straight at him and they won't let facts get in the way.
Is butting into local elections a legitimate function of DOJ or of any federal office, for that matter?
Answer: Meet Thomas Perez — a jack-boot mindset
There is a much larger issue at stake here — well beyond the fate of the sheriff — important as that is.
The man directing the Civil rights Division of DOJ has a history of trashing those who disagree with him. In his book, if you accept that some people are more talented than others, live longer than others, succeed more readily in their professional lives — if you accept all that, as most normal people do — then you are a bigot to be dealt with by the Perez Gestapo.
You see, Thomas Perez believes in interpreting "civil rights" by the "disparate impact theory." You may not intend to discriminate, but if — despite your best efforts — the end results show a disparity in such areas as test scores or mortgage lending — then it cannot be the result of anything other than bigotry. Never can it have anything to do with pure ability.
That kind of rationale (knowingly putting people in houses they could not afford) had much to do with the collapse of the housing market, which led to our worst recession since the Great Depression. But no matter. Commissar Perez — who prepped the investigators who swooped down on Maricopa County, Arizona — has a law of nature be damned view of the world.
It was my misfortune to have had Tom Perez as my County Councilman in Montgomery County, Maryland (suburban Washington, D.C.) from 2002 to 2006.
Mr. Perez was also President of the infamous Casa de Maryland. That pro-lawbreaking group crafted a pamphlet explaining to illegal aliens how they can avoid being caught. The organization has been funded by the likes of George Soros — the moneybags of the Hate-America Left — and by pro-communist dictator Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, whose oil company reportedly bestowed $1 million on the outlaw lobby. (Think about that if you're ever tempted to pull up to a CITGO station).
In 2006, Casa de Maryland threatened to protest at the schools of children whose parents favored enforcement of the nation's immigration laws. They followed up by going to Montgomery County schools to recruit the kiddies to join pro-amnesty protesters. The children were offered credits to join a Casa de Maryland march on Washington. (No brainwashing indoctrination here. Move right along, folks.) Our Montgomery tax dollars at work: Casa de Maryland also gets some public funding from the county.
In fact, Perez is a living, walking poster child for Montgomery County's having morphed (during my years living there) from moderate Republican to liberal Democrat to Looney Left.
Perez's efforts were instrumental in Casa de Maryland's opposition to efforts to keep illegals from obtaining Maryland drivers licenses. He also fought to obtain in-state tuition rates for those who committed a crime by crashing our borders in the first place. By contrast, out-of-state legal residents did not warrant Mr. Perez's tender concerns. They paid the full tuition. Indirectly at least, they — along with us Maryland taxpayers — paid the difference for the illegals.
The man is so imbued with partisan slashing and burning, he just can't help himself from spewing partisan hate when he's addressing a non-partisan or bipartisan audience.
Keeping it up on the federal level
At one point, Perez was in-house counsel to the late Senator Ted Kennedy, whose dogmatic rants were best illustrated by his vile "Robert Bork's America" speech wherein the Massachusetts Democrat willfully prostituted his senatorial privilege of immunity from legal action for blood-libel. Kennedy vigorously supported the mass crashing of America's borders.
There is no end to Thomas Perez's history of grab-grab-grab for all dictatorial powers necessary to force others to march to his orders. He reportedly is mulling over the idea of controlling the Internet and perpetrating — as York describes it — "a crackdown on Web sites on the theory that the Internet is a public accommodation." (What am I supposed to say about that? Come and get me, copper?)
Perez obviously relishes his power-grabbing job, having told liberal lawyers, "I am going to be calling each and every one of you to recruit you, because we've got 102 new positions in our budget."
How did Perez get his job? Aside from the obvious blend with the administration of the first American president who doesn't like Americans, the power-mad Marxist-minded Marylander was closely questioned at his confirmation hearings by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.). His answers were a textbook case of lawyerlike evasion.
At one point, Senator Sessions told Perez that he was "alarmed that you are painting with a very broad brush all those who stand for a lawful system of immigration enforcement 'xenophobes.'" Perez answered (unconvincingly) he was targeting another Montgomery County politician, not all opponents of illegal immigration. After some delay, with Harry Reid cracking the whip, the Senate confirmed him 72-22.
Hate-mongering at DOJ
To look at his picture, if you didn't know any better, you would assume Thomas Perez was a benign nerd — maybe a mama's boy. Those who know about the real Thomas Perez will not be misled. He is imbued with deep intolerance for anyone who sees the world differently from his own view. And he has lots of your tax dollars at his disposal to see that you toe the line. He is a menace to freedom as Americans have come to understand it.
Thomas Perez: Obama's one-man Gestapo
03-09-2013, 09:52 PM #4
‘Every Single One’ Fallout: Justice Dept. in Turmoil From PJMedia Series
What’s happened up until now, and what internal leaks say about what’s coming. Hint: jobs may now be at stake. (This is the twelfth of a series of articles about the Justice Department's hiring practices since President Obama took office. Read parts one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, and eleven.)
113 and Oh.
Following the Justice Department’s long-delayed compliance with a Freedom of Information Act request, PJMedia recently published content from the resumes of each career attorney hired to the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division under Attorney General Eric Holder. The articles were written by two former Civil Rights Division attorneys — J. Christian Adams and Hans von Spakovsky — and PJMedia Editor Richard Pollock.
The Justice Department is forbidden by federal law from hiring employees based on political affiliation. Yet the resumes revealed the following ideological breakdown among the new hires:
Leftist lawyers: 113
Moderate, non-ideological, or conservative lawyers: 0.
That represents the basest headline for the series, the matter-of-fact evidence that should lead any reasonable observer to believe the DOJ has employed an illegal political litmus test during the interview process. But the “Every Single One” series has provided additional benefits: the results present the inherent flaw in leftism’s perversion of the term “civil rights,” while providing a real world example of the flawed belief actualized. Additionally, the “Every Single One” series presents ramifications that reach far beyond the individuals most directly affected by DOJ activity.
We hope not to understate it: this perversion of “civil rights“ is the beating heart of leftism itself.
Only one definition of “civil rights” could ever logically exist: that of equal protection under the law, the law defined as the codified protection of an individual’s life, liberty, and property. Yet Eric Holder, Loretta King, Thomas Perez, the 113 hires — they claim that civil rights, and the Division established to enforce them, reside in racial, gender, disability, and even sexuality preferences presiding above the law, in the hands of an elite few trusted by an elite public class to establish some breed of “fair lawlessness.”
The flaw is obvious: when the law is not equally applied, a citizen’s actions are no longer their own.
Their fates are no longer tied to their personal adherence to life, liberty, and property, but to an unelected bureaucrat’s whim, an individual who believes both that he is qualified to make such judgments of other men and that our country’s laws allow him to do so. They claim that civil rights are not the individual’s, but somehow theirs, a definition incompatible with itself!
This is, as we know, the post-Marxist brand of tyranny — a “well-meaning” lawlessness. But prior to this series, we did not know that since 2008 the Civil Rights Division has been populated entirely according to this ideology, behavior which represents the perfect antithesis of civil rights.
The Way-Backstory: Strom’s (D-SC) Segregation-athon
The DOJ Civil Rights Division is a product of the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first — and largely unsuccessful — of several legislative attempts to secure voting rights for blacks. The bill passed by a large margin, though passage was ardently opposed by Democratic Senator Strom Thurmond, who marked the occasion with the longest single-person filibuster in the Senate’s history: 24 hours, 18 minutes. (Please note: Democratic Senator Strom Thurmond (D-SC) was, at the time, a Democrat.)
The Act’s passage created the office of Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. This office is currently held by Obama appointee Thomas Perez, and he oversees a Division that now encompasses 11 sections: the Appellate Section, Criminal Section, Disability Rights Section, Educational Opportunities Section, Employment Litigation Section, Federal Coordination and Compliance, Housing and Civil Enforcement Section, Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices, Policy and Strategy Section, Special Litigation Section, and the Voting Section.
“Insufficient Evidence to Prosecute … ”
“Every Single One” presented key information from the resumes of each of the 113 career attorneys hired to serve within 10 of these 11 sections since the appointment of Eric Holder. The key information presented provided substantial evidence of the political leanings of each hire. In each case, enough evidence was available for a reasonable observer to determine that the hire was neither a conservative, moderate, nor apolitical.
The hiring practices within the Division should be of primary interest to the American citizen for several reasons; this series concerned itself with three. First, and inherently most urgent: employing a political litmus test during the applicant screening process is illegal under the Civil Service Reform Act. (This Act dates back to Chester Arthur, and was intended to ensure nothing other than that government hiring be merit-based.)
A political litmus for hiring is also contrary to the DOJ’s Reasonable Accommodation Statement:
Our second concern: a political litmus test — in this case, a “no exceptions” political litmus test — for employment within the Civil Rights Division raises the possibility of a significant number of Americans simply not being protected by the civil rights statutes the Division was created to enforce. Indeed, this is the singular purpose of creating a politically blind hiring process, and in practice — the discrimination statute now violated under Eric Holder — the political litmus test has unimpeachably resulted in the occurrence of this concern. See the New Black Panther case dismissal, or the2010 military voting rights scandal.
The U.S. Department of Justice is an Equal Opportunity/Reasonable Accommodation Employer. Except where otherwise provided by law, there will be no discrimination because of color, race, religion, national origin, political affiliation, marital status, disability (physical or mental), age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, genetic information, status as a parent, membership or non-membership in an employee organization, on the basis of personal favoritism, or any non-merit factor.
The third concern: the difference in federal treatment of the Bush DOJ and the Obama DOJ constitutes an uneven enforcement of the ban on a political litmus test.
On July 30, 2008, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice Glenn Fine testified before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. His statement was titled: “Politicized Hiring at the Department of Justice.” From his introduction:
And from his conclusion:
Our investigation found that [DOJ White House Liaison Monica] Goodling, Kyle Sampson (the former Chief of Staff to the Attorney General), and other staff in the Office of the Attorney General improperly considered political or ideological affiliations in screening candidates for certain career positions at the Department, in violation of federal law and Department policy.
[T]he Department must ensure that the serious problems and misconduct we found in our reports about politicized hiring for career positions in the Department do not recur in the future.
PJ Media Â» â€˜Every Single Oneâ€™ Fallout: Justice Dept. in Turmoil From PJMedia Series
03-10-2013, 08:24 AM #5
"They smiled in our faces then stabbed us in the back with this lawsuit," Arpaio told the Washington Times. "Now it's time to take the gloves off."
Please take them off, Sheriff Joe! We The People stand behind you! You are an elected official, showing that we approve of the job you are doing.
03-12-2013, 11:58 AM #6
Some in GOP likely to block Perez; Marylander seen as a Labor Cabinet pick
By Tim Devaney
The Washington Times
Monday, March 11, 2013
President Obama is expected this week to pick former Maryland
Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez as his new Labor Department head, but it’s unclear, after Sen. Rand Paul’s dramatic 13-hour filibuster of a vote on a new CIA director last week, if Republicans have the stomach for another nomination fight.Mr. Perez, 51, has led the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division since 2009 as an assistant U.S. attorney general.
Previously, he served as Maryland’s labor
secretary, and before that he was the first Hispanic to be elected to the Montgomery County Council.
Unions are upbeat about the possibility of a Perez nomination.“I would describe him as being friendly to labor,” said Fred Mason, president of the Maryland State and District of Columbia AFL-CIO. “I would also describe him as being friendly to business. He understands the role that both play in moving American society forward
.”The Hispanic community is also behind Mr. Perez, who would be the second consecutive Hispanic labor secretary, following Hilda L. Solis, who resigned in January after being appointed at the beginning of the Obama administration’s first term.“It is very, very exciting that another Hispanic representative will take over Hilda Solis‘ position,” said Angela Franco, president and CEO of the Greater Washington Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
“It’s important that President Obama has a Cabinet that understands the different faces that this country has. It’s important to have a perspective from everybody. It shows the diversity that represents this country.”But critics say Mr. Perez brings with him baggage from his time in the Justice Department.
GOP lawmakers point to a court case in St. Paul, Minn., where he is accused of using questionable tactics to persuade the city to drop a lawsuit that would have made it more difficult to prove race discrimination.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican who has long opposed Mr. Perez, was one of several lawmakers last year behind a letter that criticized Mr. Perez for his role in this case that could cost taxpayers $180 million.“It’s hard to believe that the president would nominate somebody at the heart of a congressional investigation and so deeply involved in a controversial decision to make a shady deal with the city of St. Paul, Minnesota
, that ultimately led to losing the American taxpayer potentially hundreds of millions of dollars,” he said in a statement.
“If Mr. Perez is nominated, he should face a lot of tough
questions about this quid pro quo deal he appears to have put together,” Mr. Grassley added.
Rep. Sam Graves, the Missouri Republican who chairs the House Small Business Committee, challenged the Labor Department’s recent record of attacking businesses.“If nominated, I hope that Mr. Perez will be more open than his predecessor to the concerns of small businesses before pushing regulations that could put them out of business,” Mr. Graves said in a statement. “Small businesses have been handicapped by unnecessarily burdensome regulations during the first term of President Obama, and this trend must stop.”This puts the Greater Washington Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in the unique position of representing both the Hispanic community, which is cheering the move, and a business community likely to be more skeptical about Mr. Perez.Ms. Franco addressed this dilemma.
Read more: Some in GOP likely to block Perez; Marylander seen as a Labor Cabinet pick - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
03-12-2013, 06:56 PM #7
Obama to Nominate Sharia Supporter, Illegal Immigrant Advocate as Labor Secretary
March 12, 2013
By Matthew Vadum
President Obama reportedly intends to nominate in-your-face radical leftist lawyer Thomas Perez as his next Secretary of Labor.
Now an assistant attorney general at the U.S. Department of Justice, Perez is a former top aide to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and possibly a perjurer.
Perez led the Obama administration's assault on voter ID laws last year. As John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky report in Who's Counting, as a member of the Montgomery County, Md., Council in 2003 he also tried to force governments to accept fraud-prone matricula consular ID cards issued by Mexican consular offices. He was a board member of Casa de Maryland, an advocacy group for illegal aliens funded by George Soros and the recently deceased Hugo Chavez.
Perez is apparently in favor of Saudi-style anti-blasphemy laws. In Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries offenders can be condemned to death merely for insulting Islam.
Amazingly, at a congressional hearing last year, Perez pointedly declined to rule out bringing such laws to the United States. At the July 27, 2012, meeting of the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on the Constitution, Perez refused to say whether he would uphold the religious speech protections in the First Amendment in the future.
"Will you tell us ... that this administration's Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?" Congressman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) asked four times to no avail.
Perez, like so many Obama administration officials, believes that America is a seething hotbed of "Islamophobia," filled with ignorant racist rubes who irrationally fear the Muslim religion. He has worked with hardcore Islamist groups such as the terrorist-linked Islamic Society of North America and applauded Islamists for lobbying against airline security measures.
He played a major role in enacting the Church Arson Prevention Act, legislation based on the false premise that black churches were being targeted with disproportionate frequency by arsonists.
Perez, now nominally the nation's top civil rights enforcer at the Department of Justice, has an appalling track record at the DOJ and myriad unsavory associations.
He has targeted Maricopa County, Ariz. Sheriff Joe Arpaio, for legal harassment because he doesn't like Arpaio's tough-on-crime approach, especially with respect to illegal aliens.
Under Perez, the DOJ has refused to prosecute hate crimes committed against white Americans. He was reportedly instrumental in the Justice Department's dismissal of a case involving two Philadelphia-based members of the New Black Panther Party who intimidated white voters on Election Day 2008.
Perez graduated from Harvard Law School, long a hotbed of radical leftist activity. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) recently irritated left-wingers when an old speech of his surfaced in which he pointed out that Harvard Law is filled with what he called "communists."
Cruz, of course, was correct. Harvard Law is bursting with adherents of "Critical Legal Studies" which is a crude legal theory derived from Marxism.
If confirmed, Perez would replace Hilda Solis, a former Democratic congresswoman from Los Angeles who resigned in January.
Solis treated the Labor Department as an arm of the labor movement and treated business as an enemy, not a partner in creating jobs. She also discarded Bush era transparency rules that fought union corruption.
As Capital Research Center (my employer) president Terrence Scanlon wrote, one of the most important things Solis did at the Department of Labor was
her reversal of Bush administration efforts to fight union corruption. Ms. Solis' predecessor, Elaine Chao, had issued several rule changes to make it easier for union members and watchdogs to detect wrongdoing, especially conflicts of interest among union officials and the people with whom they do business.
Will Perez be even worse than Solis?
Articles: Obama to Nominate Sharia Supporter, Illegal Immigrant Advocate as Labor SecretaryWe have immigration laws that just need to be enforced.
03-13-2013, 05:04 PM #8NO AMNESTY
DON'T REWARD THE CRIMINAL ACTIONS OF MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS
BY GIVING THEM CITIZENSHIP