Thursday, October 9, 2014

Luz Robles' New Hubby Was Honored by Mexico in 2011

Juan Carlos Escamilla, Luz Robles' new husband, was awarded the prestigious "Ohtli" award in 2011.  

What is the Ohtli?

It is an award granted by the Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (IME) through the Mexican consular network in the United States.

The IME, as you may recall, is the branch of the Mexican Foreign Ministry that coordinates the activities of the Consejo Consultivo del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (CCIME) - the advisory board that Luz Robles served on from 2006-2008.

From the IME website description of the award, we have the following:

"One of the objectives of the Institute of Mexicans in the Exterior (IME) is to strengthen relations with the Mexican community and those of Mexican origin residing outside of our country. To this end we have put into operation a great variety of projects that have allowed us to strengthen the links of Mexico with her diaspora."

("Uno de los objetivos del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (IME) es fortalecer las relaciones con la comunidad mexicana y de origen mexicano residente fuera de nuestro país. Con este fin se han puesto en operación una gran variedad de proyectos que nos han permitido estrechar los lazos de México con su diáspora.")

The IME description of this prestigious award also tells us:

"This award is given, to individuals who have dedicated most of their life and professional activity, to "open a path" abroad, so that the younger generations of Mexicans who have followed them, find a path relatively easier to walk."

("Este reconocimiento se otorga, a personas que han dedicado la mayor parte de su vida y actividad profesional, a “abrir brecha” en el extranjero, para que las generaciones más jóvenes de mexicanos y mexicanas que los han seguido, encuentren un camino relativamente más fácil de andar.")

Generally speaking, each consular area is permitted to award one Ohtli per year.  

The IME page describing the Ohtli award is at:

The newsletter ("Informe") of the CCIME also carried a story about Mr. Escamilla's Ohtli (see page six at the link below):

Some photos of Mr. Escamilla receiving the award are at:

How did Mr. Escamilla feel about receiving the award?

According to an article in the Yuma Sun about the event, Mr. Escamilla had this to say:

“I would like to thank the Mexican Consulate in Yuma and the consulate’s Institute of Mexicans in the Exterior for this profound honor,” Escamilla said in a prepared statement. “As mayor it is my most solemn obligation to serving others. It makes me so proud to be among those who have received this distinction and recognition in the past."

He also added this:

“I will accept this award on behalf of all the Hispanics who work tremendously in improving the lives of others. It has not been easy to persevere in the mission of preserving our Hispanic cultural heritage, our rights as Latinos, but we will continue to strive and be successful to achieve the place we deserve in the United States. Our history shows that if we work together, we can accomplish great things.”

The Yuma Sun article is available at:

It seems rather strange for elected officials in America to be receiving awards from a foreign nation for serving, in some sense, the interests of that nation.  

Mr. Escamilla, at the time he received this award, was the mayor of San Luis, Arizona.  

He is currently a member of the Arizona House of Representatives.  

Mexico, through its IME website, has stated that one of its goals is "to strengthen the links of Mexico with her diaspora."  The Ohtli award should be seen in that light - as a propaganda tool of the Mexican government to strengthen ties between itself and those of Mexican heritage in the United States.  

It is hard to fault the sincere efforts of well-meaning people who seek to better the lives of others.  I am not criticizing such efforts by Mr. Escamilla.

However, the ethnocentric politics being promoted in America by Mexico should be carefully examined and Mexico should be politely, but firmly, told to mind its own business.  

Thursday, October 2, 2014

Key Luz Robles Campaign Contact a Former Candidate for the Mexican Legislature

One of the most interesting aspects of Luz Robles' association with Mexico's Consejo Consultivo del Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (CCIME) was her strange presence at the April 2009 CCIME meeting in Mexico.

This was after having taken office as a Utah State Senator.

Much more information about why she may have been at this meeting can be found at:

Germán Trejo was also there.

Who is Germán Trejo?

He is a long-term associate of Luz Robles, having served with her on the CCIME from 2006-2008 and worked with her on the same commission for much of that time. His associated campaign consulting company, G&T Consulting, was also a campaign consultant for her 2008 Utah State Senate campaign. Her reports for her current campaign indicate that Trejo associated campaign companies are a key component of her campaign.

From the article linked above:
Germán Trejo has a close relationship with Luz Robles - they both served on the same CCIME commission (political affairs) for a time. Germán Trejo, you may recall, was also a significant advisor to Luz Robles' state senate campaign - contributing $6,000.00 in in-kind contributions pre-convention in 2008.
In that earlier post, I suggested that one reason Luz Robles may have been in Mexico was to help with an effort to push the major Mexican political parties to create a law mandating a quota of migrant candidates. Other proposals for migrant representation were also circulating among certain immigrant leaders in the U.S. with the goal of achieving immigrant representation in the Mexican legislature.

A Trejo associated campaign company, Battleground Solutions, has this quote from Luz Robles featured prominently on their website:
Every candidate needs consultants that know what they are doing and know how to achieve the ultimate goal of winning.
Battleground Solutions’ professionalism and determination are felt throughout the staff by always meeting their goals. German Trejo is a great strategist. He is able to vision the necessary process to get to the goal.
He is very detailed oriented and is always thinking ahead. His communication skills allow him to keep a team apprised of the processes that are needed in order to achieve the goals the campaign has set forth whether they be short or long term goals.

From the website,, the following is found at the bottom of the "about" page:
In 2009, Trejo ran for Congress in Mexico as an “Immigrant Congressional” candidate (Diputado Migrante), under Mexico’s proportional representation system. Trejo’s candidacy received wide media coverage in Mexico. As a candidate, Trejo exposed the lack of political rights provided by Mexico’s top electoral institutions and political parties to Mexican ex-pats. As a result of these issues raised by Germán Trejo’s campaign, the Human Rights Commission in Mexico issued an official recommendation to the Mexican Government and Mexican political parties to stop violating the political rights of Mexicans living abroad.
In other words, at some point during the 2009 Mexican legislative electoral time-frame, Germán Trejo was himself a candidate for the Mexican Chamber of Deputies (similar to the U.S. House of Representatives).

Why is this significant?

A fair question to ask of Luz Robles is how close she is to Germán Trejo and how compatible are her views to his when it comes to immigrants and illegal aliens in the United States having political representation in a foreign legislature.

Can one legitimately be dedicated to serving the United States while holding the view that a large segment of the population should also be represented in a foreign nation?

Would pursuing political rights in Mexico for immigrants living in the United States serve to help assimilate immigrants to America or serve to make that process much more difficult and conflicted?

Imagine a voting block of immigrants, both legal and illegal, pursuing their political agenda in Mexico of pushing Mexico to advance their agenda in the United States while pushing the United States to cater to their political power.

In broader terms, it seems to be the perfect wedge to attack the sovereignty of the United States in favor of transnational rights and the globalist goal of creating supranational governing structures.

For more information about Luz Robles and the CCIME, please see the links below:

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Luz Robles' Fizzling Campaign Theme

Thursday night, 9/25/14, Utah State Senator Luz Robles will debate Representative Chris Stewart.

The question is: will she continue her early campaign theme of trying to paint Stewart as an extremist or will she adopt a different tactic?

Her campaign website (, for example, quotes her as saying:

"I think my record speaks for itself in the Legislature. I’m very much in the middle. I focus on issues of veterans, immigration and education that are pertinent to all Americans."

The website then quotes former Utah State Democratic Party Chair (and current state senator), Jim Dabakis:

"Voters, will come to see Stewart as an extremist who doesn't really share Utah values."

Ms. Robles apparently wants us to see her as one of us, as just a regular person, fighting to make Utah and the United States better by removing the extremist, Chris Stewart, from office.

The extremist theme was also used several times in early campaign emails.

For example, in a 10/30/13 email, the campaign threw in these two gems:

"The only way we can see real change is to replace extremists in Congress like Chris Stewart."

"We must have the resources to combat the special interests that support extremists like my opponent who recklessly shut down the government."

A bit later in the year (12/28/13), the campaign threw this into an email:

"Going into the New Year, we must prove that we can keep this pace up in the face of these outside interests and extremists that support our opponent’s Tea Party agenda."

The new year (1/23/14) brought a couple more slams to reinforce the theme:

"My opponent is completely out of touch with what Utahns and the 2nd Congressional District believe are most important."

"We cannot afford 2 more years of an extremist Congressman that supported the government shutdown, cost Utahns over $300M and is completely disconnected from the State and the hard working people of the 2nd Congressional District."

To be honest, I have not seen any Robles campaign emails since March, so I don't know if Ms. Robles has continued with this extremist theme since then or not.

But, if the tone of statements about Mia Love on the Utah State Democratic Party Facebook page is any indication, the theme of labeling opponents as extremists may be a more widespread strategy of the Democrats than the representation of a single campaign's conscious decision to flay an opponent with misleading labels.

It will be interesting, therefore, to see the debate and how Ms. Robles characterizes Rep. Stewart's views and record.

In any event, the move to characterize Rep. Stewart as an extremist appears to be fizzling and a non-starter as we head into the final weeks of the campaign.  

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

A New Book Sheds Light on the Lack of Need for Foreign STEM Workers:

A new book, Falling Behind? Boom, Bust & the Global Race for Scientific Talent by Michael Teitelbaum,  gives us "essential background information regarding our policies about high-tech migrants," according to David North.

Mr. North, writing about the book in a brief review at, also noted:
"The author politely dismisses the claims that there are widespread shortages of STEM workers, but notes with care the strenuous efforts of various interest groups (including Silicon Valley, immigration lawyers, many universities, and the Chamber of Commerce) to make the opposite point. Unfortunately, those voices of authority (and moneyed interests) carried the day on issue after issue..."
Mark Zuckerberg, of Facebook fame, has been busy spending millions trying to bring about a cheap-labor bonanza for Silicon Valley.  Perhaps someone should send him a copy of the book.  Unfortunately, I doubt he would read it - as he clearly has hitched his horse to the moneyed interests and against the American worker.  

Friday, April 18, 2014

Religion, Contention and the Open Mind in the Immigration Debate:

When religion enters into the immigration debate, it can at times become rather contentious.

Jerry Kammer at has written:

"I came to work at the Center for Immigration Studies because I wanted to respond to those who try to shut down the discussion by claiming that those who want to limit immigration are motivated not by legitimate concerns but by bigotry, racism, nativism, and anti-immigrant hostility.

"I want to be part of a well-informed discussion of the complexity and moral ambiguity of the issues involved in shaping immigration policy. I think people on both sides of the debate should take note of this admonition from Jonathan Haidt:
[I]f you are trying to change an organization or a society and you do not consider the effects of your changes on moral capital, then you're asking for trouble. This, I believe, is the fundamental blind spot of the left. It explains why liberal reforms so often backfire and why communist revolutions usually end up in despotism. It is the reason I believe that liberalism – which has done so much to bring about freedom and equal opportunity – is not sufficient as a governing philosophy. It tends to overreach, change too many things too quickly, and reduce the stock of moral capital inadvertently. Conversely, while conservatives do a better job of preserving moral capital, they often fail to notice certain classes of victims, fail to limit the predations of certain powerful interests, and fail to see the need to change or update institutions as times change.
"In order to have this discussion, each side must be willing to open our ears and our eyes to the other..."

The article by Kammer is available at:

Jerry Kammer on Religion in the Immigration Debate:

Jerry Kammer published a series of articles about the religious aspect of the illegal immigration debate at recently (see "A Catholic's Dissent from the Bishops' Immigration Policy, Pt. 2").
Below is a citation from the second in his series:

"Yale law professor and immigration scholar Peter Schuck offered this concise explanation in his essay in the 1985 book Clamor at the Gates:
Having ordained an activist welfare state that increasingly defines liberty in terms of positive, government-created legal entitlements to at least a minimum level of individual security and well-being, the nation cannot possibly extend these ever-expanding claims against itself to mankind in general. Instead, it must restrict its primary concerns to those for whom it has undertaken a special political responsibility of protection and nourishment, most particularly those who reside within its territorial jurisdiction. Even this more limited task becomes impossible if masses of destitute people, many ill-equipped to live and work in a postindustrial society, may acquire legally enforceable claims against it merely by reaching its borders.
"I think Father Groody and the Catholic bishops should understand that U.S. immigration policy, like the U.S. Constitution, is not a suicide pact. If they believe, as I do, that we have great responsibilities to assist our society's most vulnerable members, they should not insist on policies that would overwhelm our capacity to fulfill those duties. If they persist in that delusion, they should not be surprised that they will continue to lose credibility among those who dissent from their version of Catholic social teaching."

Part one of the series is at:

Thursday, April 17, 2014

Another View of the Religious Aspect of the Immigration Debate:

"In 1986, as Congress used the commission's recommendations as the framework for Immigration Reform and Control Act, Hesburgh wrote:
I undertook my role as commission chairman by asking: Why should immigration be a problem? Why not let down the barriers and let people move freely? After our two years of study, the question answered itself. It is not enough to sympathize with the aspirations and plight of illegal aliens. We also must consider the consequences of not controlling our borders. What about the aspirations of Americans who must compete for jobs and whose wages and work standards are depressed by the presence of illegal aliens?
Concerns like these receive little or no attention at conferences like the one at Notre Dame. That is my criticism, both of the conference and of the bishops. I believe this lack of interest in – or even awareness of – the concerns of those on the other side of the debate is part of the reason for the current legislative stalemate."