Illegal immigrants having more kids in US By HOPE YEN Associated Press April 14, 2009, 10:37AM WASHINGTON — Growing numbers of children of illegal immigrants are being born in this country, and they are nearly twice as likely to live in poverty than those with American-born parents, a report says. The study released today by the Pew Hispanic Center highlights a growing dilemma in the immigration debate: Illegal immigrants' children born in the United States are American citizens, yet they struggle in poverty and uncertainty along with parents who fear deportation, toil largely in low-wage jobs and face layoffs in an ailing economy. The analysis by Pew, a nonpartisan research organization, estimated that 11.9 million illegal immigrants lived in the U.S. Of those, 8.3 million were in the labor force as of March 2008, making up 5.4 percent of the U.S. work force, primarily in lower-paying farming, construction or janitorial work. Roughly three out of four of their children — or 4 million — were born in the U.S. In 2003, 2.7 million children of illegal immigrants, or 63 percent, were born in this country. Overall, illegal immigrants' children account for one of every 15 students in kindergarten through 12th grade. Illegal immigrants also have become more geographically dispersed, increasingly passing up typical destinations like California in favor of jobs in newly emerging Hispanic areas in Southeastern states like Georgia and North Carolina. In 2008, California had the most illegal immigrants at 2.7 million, double its 1990 number, followed by Texas, Florida, New York and New Jersey. Still, California's 22 percent share of the nation's illegal immigrant population was a marked drop-off from its 42 percent share in 1990. The latest demographic snapshot comes as President Barack Obama is preparing to address the politically sensitive issue of immigration reform later this year, including a proposal to give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. Though their numbers have soared over the past two decades, the total number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. has declined or remained flat in the last few years. Demographers attribute that to slower rates of migration into the U.S. caused in part by the recession, as well as to deportations and stepped-up immigration enforcement during the Bush administration. Among the findings: • One-third of the children of illegal immigrants live in poverty, nearly double the rate for children of U.S.-born parents. • Illegal immigrants' share of low-wage jobs has grown in recent years, from 10 percent of construction jobs in 2003 to 17 percent in 2008. They also make up 25 percent of workers in farming and 19 percent in building maintenance. • The 2007 median household income of illegal immigrants was $36,000, compared with $50,000 for U.S.-born residents. In contrast to other immigrants, illegal immigrants do not earn markedly higher incomes the longer they live in the United States. • About 47 percent of illegal immigrant households have children, compared with 21 percent for U.S.-born residents and 35 percent for legal immigrants. • About three-quarters,…

   Olympic-sized loss of political face for Obama and Daley
UPDATED AT 11:56 a.m. with assessment of Obama's stakes; originally posted by Rick Pearson at 11 a.m.  Chicago’s first-round knockout in the voting for the 2016 Olympic Games presents a serious loss of face to President Barack Obama and Mayor Richard Daley, who each staked personal as well as political capital on the city’s bid. Obama, who had originally placed a priority on passage of healthcare reform over a trip to Copenhagen, was in the air returning to the United States from the International Olympic Committee voting site as his hometown was tossed out of consideration. It was a worst-case scenario for the president, who was already facing criticism for getting involved in the effort even before the decision was made. Obama has found his public support slumping amid the controversial efforts to reform the health care system, the national recession and the war in Afghanistan. Nationally, Republicans had been using Obama’s choice to quickly fly to Copenhagen as an effort to help his “Chicago Fat Cat Friends.” The GOP pointed out that the September unemployment for the country had risen to 9.8 percent while the president was trying to bring jobs to Chicago “seven years from now.” Daley, who had derided the Olympic selection process before throwing his weight behind a Chicago bid in 2005, was counting on a win to boost Chicago’s economy and reinvigorate his own standing.  The quick loss represents an embarrassment of international and local dimensions for a mayor who has dominated the city landscape and is used to getting what he wants. Princeton presidential scholar Fred Greenstein said for Obama, “the net result will be negative, but on the other hand, I don’t think this will be a body blow to his presidency.”  The loss would have been diminished if Chicago actually had made it to the final rounds of voting, he said. “It doesn’t do him any good, I don’t think,” Greenstein said of Chicago’s first-round ouster. “He certainly made the effort. Even Obama has limits to his energy, including crossing the Atlantic to make the presentation.” The defeat “means more in Chicago, than it does in the nation,” he noted. “I think it’s a fairly small issue compared with health and whether the economy bounces back and whether the administration does something plausible in Afghanistan.” In today’s highly polarized political environment, Obama stands to be criticized for whatever he does, and an ongoing problem—slippage in his support from centrist voters—could be exacerbated by Chicago’s defeat, since Obama threw his personal and political prestige behind it, Greenstein said. You can read about aldermanic and congressional reaction by clicking here.    

 Is Julianne Moore Hollywood’s savviest and sanest star?Ditch the limos, the electric gates, live on a normal street, stay low-key, show a little grace, and a bona fide, four times Oscar-nominated movie actress can walk unpestered to collect her son from school... Julianne Moore with her husband, Bart Freundlich Read Article     

  New Protest Builds as Iran Expands Its Crackdown By NAZILA FATHI and ALAN COWELL  TEHRAN — Iran expanded its crackdown on journalists on Wednesday to try to block any coverage of opposition activities, but protesters reached by phone said that tens of thousands had massed in central Tehran again to demonstrate against the disputed presidential election. They described marching silently down a major thoroughfare, with some holding photos of Mir Hussein Moussavi, the main opposition candidate in Friday’s vote. Others lifted their hands high in the air with green ribbons on their wrists and laced through their fingers. It was the fifth day of unrest since election officials declared a landslide victory for the incumbent, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Meanwhile, news reports quoting the semi-official Fars news agency directly accused the United States of interference in the disputed election, summoning the Swiss ambassador, who represents American interests in Tehran, to complain of “interventionist” statements. President Obama said a day earlier that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling.” But he has also said he was “deeply troubled by the violence” in Iran and that democratic values needed to be observed. The Iranian Foreign Ministry officials, without being specific about which comments they were reacting to, expressed “protest and displeasure,” the news agency said. Despite the government’s attempts to block communications among the opposition, calls for more mass defiance continued. In a message on a Web site associated with him, Mr. Moussavi called on his supporters to rally again on Thursday, and to go to their local mosques to mourn protesters killed in the demonstrations, officially numbering seven. His call directly challenged Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had urged Mr. Moussavi to work through the country’s electoral system in contesting the election results. Iranians using the Internet messaging service Twitter had already spread the word about a silent demonstration to be held 5 p.m. Wednesday and called on protesters to wear green, the signature color of the opposition. The sense of threat against the opposition was growing. Reuters reported that Mohammadreza Habibi, the senior prosecutor in the central province of Isfahan, had warned demonstrators that they could be executed under Islamic law. “We warn the few elements controlled by foreigners who try to disrupt domestic security by inciting individuals to destroy and to commit arson that the Islamic penal code for such individuals waging war against God is execution,” Mr. Habibi said, according to the Fars news agency. It was not clear if his warning applied only to Isfahan or the country as a whole, Reuters said. The government’s new restrictions were directed at blocking communications between opposition supporters and any news coverage of their activities.…

  Republican doves are hatchingRepublican support for Obama's troop build-up is tepid – and could quickly change if things go badly in AfghanistanComments (12)  James Antle guardian.co.uk, Thursday 3 December 2009 Article historyBy sending more troops to Afghanistan but in smaller numbers than originally requested by General McChrystal and with strings attached, President Barack Obama may believe he has stumbled upon a formula that will please everybody. He may discover that he has pleased no one.Most Republicans will back the president, as long as "victory" in Afghanistan, however defined, appears attainable. In fact, this will be the first major initiative of the Obama administration to garner more Republican than Democratic support. But GOP support will not be unanimous.The most outspoken of the neoconservatives and Republican hawks are giving the president no quarter. Even before Obama spoke, former vice-president Dick Cheney was denouncing the new commander-in-chief for going wobbly in front of the world."Here's a guy without much experience, who campaigned against much of what we put in place … and who now travels around the world apologising," Cheney told Politico. "I think our adversaries – especially when that's preceded by a deep bow – see that as a sign of weakness." Our average Afghan friend, meanwhile, "sees talk about exit strategies and how soon we can get out, instead of talk about how we win."Karl Rove was more interested in defending his old boss than cheering the continuity between Bush and Obama policies. "President Obama is in no position whatsoever to criticise what President Bush did, because in 2007, President Obama, then a member of the United States senate, voted against war funding for Iraq and Afghanistan," Rove said on NBC's Today show. "If this was so vital, then why did he not speak out?"Other Republicans will find their war fever cools now that a Democrat is in office. Congressional Republicans adamantly opposed the Clinton administration's military interventions in the Balkans in the 1990s, even as neoconservative journalists were cheering them on. Republicans tend to rediscover conservatism's older non-interventionist tendencies when faced with what Bob Dole once bitterly described as "Democrat wars".Representatives Ron Paul and Walter Jones, the most outspoken Republican opponents of the Afghan surge, are part of their party's small antiwar minority on Iraq. While they both defeated pro-war primary challengers and Paul took over a million votes as a Republican presidential candidate in 2008, they haven't gained much traction in their efforts to change the GOP's foreign policy.But some Republicans who supported the Iraq war are having buyer's remorse when it comes to the Afghanistan escalation. Representative Dana Rohrabacher is no Ron Paul, but he has said he will vote against funding the president's request for additional troops. "Sending 30,000 more combat…