Tag Archives: immigration

CBS: ‘Tough’ Pennsylvania Immigration Law, Like ‘Controversial’ Arizona Law, Faces ‘Fierce Opposition’

Posted on July 13, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

On Saturday’s CBS Evening News, anchor Jeff Glor reported on an immigration protest in Boston: “…hundreds opposed to Arizona’s controversial immigration law protested the presence of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at a meeting there.” One protestor held a sign that read: “Jan Brewer is a Bigot.” Glor then turned to a report on a similar immigration law proposed in Pennsylvania.   Correspondent Elaine Quijano explained how a CBS News poll showed 52% of Americans support the Arizona’s immigration law and that “other states are preparing to follow Arizona’s lead”: “In Pennsylvania, bipartisan measures to compel construction companies to check worker’s status are moving swiftly through the legislature.” She then warned: “Republican state representative Daryl Metcalfe wants to go further, introducing a tough measure modeled after Arizona’s law.” She went on to declare: “Metcalfe’s proposal is already facing fierce opposition.” Quijano described one source of that “fierce opposition,” the Democratic mayor of Philadelphia: “Michael Nutter says the solution lies with the federal government, not the states.” Nutter repeated Obama administration talking points on the issue: “We should not have a patchwork of immigration policies for every state in the United States of America. That’s insane.” Quijano added: “Nutter believes the law could create problems for law enforcement, making illegal immigrants afraid to report crimes to police.” In addition to highlighting Nutter’s objections to the proposal, Quijano began her report by describing the plight of one illegal immigrant from the state: “Every day 23 year-old Jose fears he could be deported. His parents brought him to America illegally from Mexico when he was two.” Quijano lamented: “He grew up in Pennsylvania, feeling every bit American, but it wasn’t until high school that he realized what it meant to be an illegal immigrant. That he could not pursue his dream of joining the Air Force.” While Quijano’s report featured five sound bites from Nutter and Jose, it only included two from state representative Metcalfe. She described how “Metcalfe argues illegal immigrants strain city and state budgets by siphoning off health and social services that Americans pay for.” In the clip that followed, Metcalfe argued: “For decades in the past the federal government has been AWOL in securing or borders and protecting American lives, liberty, and property, so we at the state level need to join together to do so.” Quijano concluded the segment by observing: “As politicians grapple with these issues, people like Jose wait and worry.” Jose remarked: “I don’t remember Mexico. To me this is my only home.” Quijano added: “A country that continues to struggle with this divisive issue.” Here is a full transcript of the July 10 report: 6:38PM JEFF GLOR: In Boston, hundreds opposed to Arizona’s controversial immigration law protested the presence of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at a meeting there. The law’s facing legal challenges from the Justice Department. Arizona was the first, but likely will not be the last. Dozens of states right now are considering enacting similar immigration laws in the coming months. Elaine Quijano has this report from Pennsylvania. JOSE: We want to come out of the shadows. ELAINE QUIJANO: Every day 23 year-old Jose fears he could be deported. His parents brought him to America illegally from Mexico when he was two. He grew up in Pennsylvania, feeling every bit American, but it wasn’t until high school that he realized what it meant to be an illegal immigrant. That he could not pursue his dream of joining the Air Force. JOSE: I lost all hope. I said I can’t join the armed forces, I can’t get a good job. So basically I got pushed into the shadows like any other undocumented.      QUIJANO: Jose is one of the country’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, whose status is sparking heated debate. Debate and demonstrations have also interrupted over a new Arizona law allowing police to check the immigration of status of anyone suspected of being involved in crime. A recent CBS poll found a majority of Americans, 52%, support the law. Now other states are preparing to follow Arizona’s lead. In Pennsylvania, bipartisan measures to compel construction companies to check worker’s status are moving swiftly through the legislature. Republican state representative Daryl Metcalfe wants to go further, introducing a tough measure modeled after Arizona’s law. DARYL METCALFE: As a nation, we have to set a no amnesty policy and we have to be very black and white about that. That there’s no reward for violating our border. QUIJANO: Metcalfe’s proposal is already facing fierce opposition. Here in Philadelphia, where more than half of the immigrant population is illegal, Mayor Michael Nutter says the solution lies with the federal government, not the states. MICHAEL NUTTER: We should not have a patchwork of immigration policies for every state in the United States of America. That’s insane. QUIJANO: Nutter believes the law could create problems for law enforcement, making illegal immigrants afraid to report crimes to police. NUTTER: We do not want to send the wrong message to victims or witnesses. QUIJANO: But Representative Metcalfe argues illegal immigrants strain city and state budgets by siphoning off health and social services that Americans pay for. METCALFE: For decades in the past the federal government has been AWOL in securing or borders and protecting American lives, liberty, and property, so we at the state level need to join together to do so. QUIJANO: As politicians grapple with these issues, people like Jose wait and worry. JOSE: I don’t remember Mexico. To me this is my only home. QUIJANO: A country that continues to struggle with this divisive issue. Elaine Quijano, CBS News, Philadelphia.

Read more from the original source:
CBS: ‘Tough’ Pennsylvania Immigration Law, Like ‘Controversial’ Arizona Law, Faces ‘Fierce Opposition’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Scoring Sunday’s Nuptials: Olympic Champion Wins Gold In Relay Race of Love [Altarcations]

Posted on July 11, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

What do Olympic gold medalists in nordic skiing do in the summer? They get married. Join Olympics nerd and Gawker wedding expert Phyllis Nefler as she parses today’s New York Times weddings announcements. She goes for the gold every day. More

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Gossip, Hot Stuff, TV

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

CNN Again Omits Pro-Illegal Immigration Stance of ‘Public Defender’

Posted on July 7, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

On Wednesday’s Newsroom, CNN’s Tony Harris omitted the pro-illegal immigration activism of guest Isabel Garcia, just as his colleague Suzanne Malveaux did more than two months earlier . Harris twice referred to Garcia as merely the “deputy public defender in Pima County, Arizona,” and didn’t mention her involvement in the beating and decapitation of a pinata effigy of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The anchor brought on the activist, as well as Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, the author of the state newly-passed anti-illegal immigration law, for two segments starting 10 minutes into the 11 am Eastern hour. After asking Senator Pearce’s position on the federal government’s new lawsuit against the enforcement of his law, Harris turned to the public defender: “Isabel, you’ve been patient. Weigh in here.” Garcia (her pro-illegal immigration organization, Coalición de Derechos Humanos, whose website features a logo incorporating the southwestern states into Mexico, was identified on-screen as the “Human Rights Coalition”) immediately went on the offense against Pearce, playing the race/ethnicity card against the Republican politician: GARCIA: This is not about protecting anybody from Arizona. (Pearce laughs) In fact, if Mr. Pearce were responsible, he would, in fact, want to protect us and protect our values in this country. Clearly, this is a supremacy issue. I mean, it’s preposterous that he argued that the federal government doesn’t have the exclusive jurisdiction on this very complicated area of law. Certainly, Arizona cannot simply regulate immigration- and he is trying to regulate immigration. As much as he tries to hide it over and over, he knows full well that they have created a new offense of not having your documents with you. And the issue of racial profiling, that he can just wipe it away so easy- well, it’s because you’re a white person, Mr. Pearce . PEARCE: Oh, what an idiot. GARCIA: You don’t have any qualms about racial profiling at all . You should be concerned about our liberties in this country. You should be concerned about the facts. The facts are that immigrants are an absolute plus to our economy- always have been. That’s why we have 11 million undocumented people here, not because we’re giving give-outs, like you’re saying. In fact, it’s the exact opposite. Immigrants contribute much more than they ever take out in health care, in educational costs, in anything. You look at any credible study, Mr. Pearce- which you should, because you’re an elected official- you should have a real body of evidence before you start talking and endanger our entire community and endanger our country. The state senator didn’t get a chance to reply to Garcia’s racially-charged accusation because the anchor then broke for commercials. After the break, Harris asked Pearce, “You acknowledge that it, at some point, becomes a federal issue, and we’re here because the government hasn’t done enough in this area. And I’m curious, are you as angry at Congress- all of Congress- for not enacting new immigration legislation- and that is Republicans, Democrats and independents?” Once Pearce answered, Harris asked Garcia a similar question, but one from the left: “We’ve got a list of 11 Republican senators who voted for immigration reform in 2006 who aren’t doing much in the way of leadership on this issue at all right now….But Democratic leadership on this issue isn’t moving it forward as well. Do you have any anger right now for Speaker Pelosi, Senate Leader Reid? This was supposed to be the year for comprehensive immigration reform .” Near the end of her reply, the pro-illegal immigration activist proffered a conspiracy theory on the issue: GARCIA: Well, really, the responsibility lays not only in all the people you have mentioned, but in previous administrations, from Clinton, to the Bush administration, to the present Obama administration- is their inability to articulate the truth to the American public that we have caused the situation . Mr. Pearce talks about people not following the laws. Let me tell you, Mexicans, specifically, and other immigrants, have followed the rules. You know what the rules have been for 100 years? Come into the country in an unauthorized fashion so you can build our country. Do you really think we’ve got 11 million people that are benefitting so profusely from give-outs? Absolutely not. We depend on these 11 million people to feed us, to clothe us, to house us, and Mr. Pearce should be thanking them rather than demonizing them, because Arizona was selected by the federal government. It was no accident. This is not occurring because the federal government has not acted. It’s the opposite . HARRIS: Okay. Got you. GARCIA: It’s because they funneled everybody through Arizona to elect the likes of Mr. Pearce – HARRIS: Oh my. GARCIA: In order to become a laboratory for everything that’s anti-immigrant . One might be inclined to add Garcia’s out-there theory to the likes of 9/11 “trutherism” and “birtherism,” and all Harris had to say in response was “oh my”? Neither Harris, nor Malveaux during the April 23, 2010 interview, brought up the activist’s participation in a 2008 protest where the pinata effigy of Sheriff Arpaio was beaten and decapitated and where she carried the figure’s head down the street. Only CNN anchor Anderson Cooper fairly questioned the “public defender” on the incident during an October 2009 segment where she appeared with Arpaio .

See the article here:
CNN Again Omits Pro-Illegal Immigration Stance of ‘Public Defender’

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

MSNBC’s Ratigan: American’s Don’t ‘Give A Damn’ About Iraq and Afghan Wars; Calls for Draft

Posted on July 1, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

On Thursday’s The Dylan Ratigan Show, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan went after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and complained about the lack opposition to the conflicts: “Why isn’t there an alarm that we’ve been perpetrating this war?… there aren’t enough people in this country that honestly give a damn. No one really cares.” His solution to the supposed apathy? A draft. Ratigan began his rant by describing the financial and human toll of the wars. He particularly highlighted “the innocent civilians that our bombs are killing. As many as 105,000 dead in Iraq, the number in Afghanistan approaching 13,000, that we have killed.” He argued: “We might even be creating more terrorists….being there may be doing more harm than good.” On his May 13 program , Ratigan condemned the U.S. military for “dropping predator bombs on civilians willy-nilly.” Describing the limited number of Americans who have loved ones on the front lines, Ratigan proclaimed: “…it’s a way for the politicians to isolate on the poorest and the most isolated group of soldiers they can get and protect themselves from our society, were they to understand how violent and oppressive the actions we are taking against our own people are in perpetrating these wars.” Ratigan then proposed: “…we have to raise the stakes on this to decide whether we get out or keep going. And the only way I can see to do that is to return the draft.” He further declared: “Maybe if the sons and daughters of more Americans families, like those of our politicians, were either being killed in combat or facing the stresses of endless repeat deployment, our policymakers would start questioning why we’re still there…” After a discussing the topic with a panel of military experts, Ratigan admitted: “I’ll be the first to tell you, I’m the most ignorant at the table when it comes to the strategic analysis of this topic.” Even so, he concluded: “…the solution is still fairly simple….Either you’re on the side that is with this and is for it and is in there supporting it, or you are there making a strong case not to be there….that means that you, if you’re willing to go, are willing to send yourself and your family members into combat. And on the flip side, in my view, are not willing to do that and as such wouldn’t want to send a fellow citizen.” An on-screen graphic read: “Get Out or Get In! End the Wars or Bring Back the Draft.” Here is transcript of the July 1 segment: 4:30PM DYLAN RATIGAN: Well, day four in our ‘Fix It Week’ garage. And today we tackle a true matter of life and death in this country, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. One of them, already America’s longest war. The other, unfortunately, not far behind, long and costly. $731 billion spent so far in Iraq. $280 billion in our efforts in Afghanistan with no clear end in sight at the end of the deadliest month in the history of the war. The cost in American lives 4,396 soldiers dead in Iraq. 1,125 killed in Afghanistan. And then there are the innocent civilians that our bombs are killing. As many as 105,000 dead in Iraq, the number in Afghanistan approaching 13,000, that we have killed. There are two main problems with what we’re doing overseas, as I see it, and why we’re not doing it well. The first, we have no political will to shift from a strategy that has been repeating itself for years with no apparent end in sight. And two, there may not even be an honest understanding of our enemy and what a modern day insurgent war strategy is, let alone, how to actually fight an effective counterinsurgency. We all know about the heroin, the bribery, the rampant political corruption. But what about our overall strategy? And what we’re doing? We might even be creating more terrorists. Our leaders may not even understand the insurgency that they are fighting against. Think about how difficult it would be to launch a so-called counterinsurgency strategy if you haven’t been able to be truly honest about how a modern day insurgency works. Very few people, unrelated, using the internet and communications to disrupt society. Bottom line, us being there may be doing more harm than good. So why isn’t that conversation taking place in our Congress and in our homes? Why isn’t there an alarm that we’ve been perpetrating this war? Well, quite simply, like the cheap price of oil, there aren’t enough people in this country that honestly give a damn. No one really cares. They may say they care. But the politicians know, there’s no – the phone’s not ringing. No one really is expressing themselves. In fact, the number of active duty troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is at the lowest level since World War II. Which means the percentage of us that are exposed to the realties of war in this country, that we’ve been fighting for a decade, is the smallest it has ever been. Why is that? Well, more than a third of our soldiers have been sent back to the front lines multiple times. Some of the same soldiers sent back five and six times to the same war. Why is that? Well, it’s a way for the politicians to isolate on the poorest and the most isolated group of soldiers they can get and protect themselves from our society, were they to understand how violent and oppressive the actions we are taking against our own people are in perpetrating these wars. It means that the fewest number of Americans are truly feeling the brunt of our wars. Meanwhile, those who are feeling it, feel it harder than any troops in American history. I think we have to raise the stakes on this to decide whether we get out or keep going. And the only way I can see to do that is to return the draft. Maybe if the sons and daughters of more Americans families, like those of our politicians, were either being killed in combat or facing the stresses of endless repeat deployment, our policymakers would start questioning why we’re still there and come up with a different way to deal with insurgent warfare in the 21st century. [PANEL DISCUSSION WITH MILITARY EXPERTS] RATIGAN: I’ll be the first to tell you, I’m the most ignorant at the table when it comes to the strategic analysis of this topic. It’s why I asked these gentlemen to join me and benefit from it. But politically, for me, the solution is still fairly simple. I don’t see how, after all these years and all this time, we can continue these types of strategies without an either ‘get out’ or ‘get in’ strategy. Either you’re on the side that is with this and is for it and is in there supporting it, or you are there making a strong case not to be there. [ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC: The Fix Solution: Get Out or Get In! End the Wars or Bring Back the Draft] And explaining, not emotionally, but from a policy standpoint, why that is. And that means that you, if you’re willing to go, are willing to send yourself and your family members into combat. And on the flip side, in my view, are not willing to do that and as such wouldn’t want to send a fellow citizen. Either way, you have to let your politicians know how you feel. We, the people are critical to this process. Dylan.MSNBC.com has contact information for each and every member of Congress. Remember, you can get mad – or you don’t get mad, I should say, if you don’t get involved. This is a classic example.

The rest is here:
MSNBC’s Ratigan: American’s Don’t ‘Give A Damn’ About Iraq and Afghan Wars; Calls for Draft

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Scientology compares itself to the Salvation Army in Senate inquiry

Posted on June 28, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

The Church of Scientology has compared itself to The Salvation Army, while defending its benefit to the community in a Senate inquiry. The organisation was scrutinised by an inquiry into legislation proposed by independent senator Nick Xenophon, which would require religious groups to prove what public benefit they provide, before getting tax breaks. Its representative, Virginia Stewart, told the committee its members lent a hand in times of disaster and promoted drug-free messages. “The church believes the proposed bill is inherently flawed and puts at risk the financial future of charities and religions in Australia,” she said. But a Church of Scientology officer from New Zealand, Mike Ferris, told the inquiry that a public interest test in his country had done no harm. Scientology has charitable status in New Zealand, where the Charity Commission of New Zealand was established in 2005. It demands charities clear a public benefit test, and makes them hand over financial statements, which are available publicly online. Mr Ferris said he believed the commission had been fair to the Church of Scientology. “I think the New Zealand Charities Commission has treated us fairly,” he said. “I think it's a fair process.” The inquiry also heard from ex-Scientologists who went public with their shocking experiences earlier this year, when Senator Xenophon twice failed in efforts to have an inquiry into abuse allegations. Among them was James Anderson, who claims he and his wife spent up to $1.2 million on Scientology materials, and Janette Vonthehoff, who says she was coerced into having abortions, and worked long hours for the organisation under duress. Both argued the organisation should not get tax-free status, because it was completely self-serving, and provided no benefit to taxpayers. Mr Ferris compared the glare on Scientology to that previously directed at The Salvation Army. “They weren't welcome here in Australia, they weren't welcome in New Zealand in the early 19th century because of their view against alcohol,” he said. “They were beaten up and they were persecuted, so where do you go?” Mr Ferris was asked why the records on the website of his country's charity commission showed the organisation went from an income of $2.6 million in 2007, to $374,000 in 2008. “I think that drop in income, was actually, from memory, was the exchange rate drop, absolutely,” he said, but later admitted he wasn't certain. The Church of Scientology also committed to handing over its books to the committee for further scrutiny. http://hiscrivener.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/tom-cruise-and-scientology.jpg http://digg.com/politics/Scientology_compares_itself_to_the_Salvation_Army added by: iamfree

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

20 States plan to copy Arizona immigration law

Posted on June 28, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Arizona's sweeping new immigration law doesn't even take effect until next month, but lawmakers in nearly 20 other states are already clamoring to follow in its footsteps. Gubernatorial candidates in Florida and Minnesota are singing the law's praises, as are some lawmakers in other states far from the Mexico border such as Idaho and Nebraska. But states also are watching legal challenges to the new law, and whether boycotts over it will harm Arizona's economy. The law, set to take effect July 29, requires police to check the immigration status of anyone they think is in the country illegally. Violators face up to six months in jail and $2,500 in fines, in addition to federal deportation. http://www.thonline.com/article.cfm?id=287398 added by: ibrake4rappers13

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Video: Mexican Drug Cartels Threaten Arizona Police

Posted on June 22, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Mexican drug cartels have been a problem along the border for a long time. However, in Nogales, Arizona, the cartels have taken things one step further by threatening to shoot police officers with snipers from across the border. Make sure you check out this post at the Eyeblast blog for more details.

Read more:
Video: Mexican Drug Cartels Threaten Arizona Police

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Illegal Immigration Raising Arizona’s Crime Rate? NY Times Says No; Relevant Figures Say Yes

Posted on June 22, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

On Sunday, New York Times reporter Randal Archibold offered up more of his slanted reporting on Arizona’s pending new immigration enforcement law, suggesting that supporters of tough immigration enforcement are fostering fear by exaggerating the problem of violent crime on the border with Mexico: ” On Border Violence, Truth Pales Compared to Ideas .” But does his evidence stand up? Two conservative writers say no, pointing to FBI statistics that show crime in towns outside major metropolitan areas and rural counties crime has increased substantially. When Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Democrat of Arizona, announced that the Obama administration would send as many as 1,200 additional National Guard troops to bolster security at the Mexican border, she held up a photograph of Robert Krentz, a mild-mannered rancher who was shot to death this year on his vast property. The authorities suspected that the culprit was linked to smuggling. “Robert Krentz really is the face behind the violence at the U.S.-Mexico border,” Ms. Giffords said. It is a connection that those who support stronger enforcement of immigration laws and tighter borders often make: rising crime at the border necessitates tougher enforcement. But the rate of violent crime at the border, and indeed across Arizona, has been declining, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, as has illegal immigration, according to the Border Patrol . While thousands have been killed in Mexico’s drug wars, raising anxiety that the violence will spread to the United States, F.B.I. statistics show that Arizona is relatively safe. That Mr. Krentz’s death nevertheless churned the emotionally charged immigration debate points to a fundamental truth: perception often trumps reality, sometimes affecting laws and society in the process . Archibold again pompously implied fear-mongering on the part of supporters of immigration enforcement: Moreover, crime statistics, however rosy, are abstract. It takes only one well-publicized crime, like Mr. Krentz’s shooting, to drive up fear. …. Crime figures, in fact, present a more mixed picture, with the likes of Russell Pearce, the Republican state senator behind the immigration enforcement law, playing up the darkest side while immigrant advocacy groups like Coalición de Derechos Humanos (Human Rights Coalition), based in Tucson, circulate news reports and studies showing that crime is not as bad as it may seem. For instance, statistics show that even as Arizona’s population swelled, buoyed in part by illegal immigrants funneling across the border, violent crime rates declined, to 447 incidents per 100,000 residents in 2008, the most recent year for which comprehensive data is available from the F.B.I. In 2000, the rate was 532 incidents per 100,000. Nationally, the crime rate declined to 455 incidents per 100,000 people, from 507 in 2000. Reporter Jennifer Steinhauer seconded Archibold’s assertion about crime dropping on the Arizona border in her Tuesday front-page profile of Sen. John McCain on the campaign trail in Arizona: While border crime has decreased in this state in recent years , the killing of a prominent rancher in the south by what the police suspect was an illegal immigrant set off rage across the state, and helped fuel a tough new state law directed at immigrants. But Tom Maguire researched the actual FBI statistics and came away with the opposite result, though his results are not definitive: …the stats reprinted below tell a different story — measured by violent crimes per 100,000, the non-MSA portion of Arizona has seen a dramatic increase in crime….these numbers do not support the case that the rural and border areas of Arizona are getting safer. Quite the contrary, actually. Maybe the Times can turn a reporter loose on that. Taking off from Maguire’s spadework, Mark Hemingway at the Washington Examiner explained: …essentially, the FBI crime stats are broken down by region and while crime has fallen 20 percent in cities from 2000 to 2008, in towns outside major metropolitan areas and rural counties crime is up 39 and 45 percent, respectively. In other words, it sure looks like crime is way up in the border regions of Arizona.

View original post here:
Is Illegal Immigration Raising Arizona’s Crime Rate? NY Times Says No; Relevant Figures Say Yes

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hispanics abandon Arizona, fleeing economy, immigration law

Posted on June 11, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

;_ylt=AudZBYxRYiHkZRecEkJYzESs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNiZWV2ZWRkBGFzc2V0A2NzbS8yMDEwMDYxMC8zMDcyMjkEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM3BHBvcwM0BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDaGlzcGFuaWNzZmxl Arizona’s hard-hitting immigration law is driving Hispanics out of the state weeks before the controversial law goes into effect. Although concrete figures are not available, anecdotal evidence suggests Hispanics, both legal residents and illegal immigrants, are starting to flee. Schools in Hispanic neighborhoods are reporting abnormal enrollment drops, and businesses that serve Hispanics also report that business is down, according to a USA Today report published Wednesday. The report suggests that the immigration law is compounding demographic trends that have already significantly curtailed illegal immigration during the past two years. The bad economy has been the primary deterrent to many Hispanic immigrants seeking to enter Arizona, says Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington. added by: bansheewail

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Celebrities, Hot Stuff

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Did Politico Inadvertently Reveal Too Much Detail About Cynical Democrat Sales Pitch for Amnesty?

Posted on June 10, 2010 by Benny Hollywood| Leave a comment

Illegal aliens. Eeek! I said the forbidden term. For the past few years the “preferable” but less accurate term to describe that group has been “illegal immigrants.” Even that modified term has been too harsh for advocates of amnesty who prefer the completely inaccurate term, “undocumented workers.” However, in order to cynically sell the public on amnesty, the Democrats are willing to temporarily swallow their pride and use “illegal immigrants” according to a Politico article written by Carrie Budoff Brown who reveals a lot more cynicism on the part of the Democrats than she probably intended: Long pilloried for being soft on illegal immigration, top Democratic officials have concluded there’s only one way they can hope to pass a comprehensive immigration bill: Talk more like Republicans. They’re seizing on the work of top Democratic Party operatives who, after a legislative defeat in 2007, launched a multiyear polling project to craft an enforcement-first, law-and-order, limited-compassion pitch that now defines the party’s approach to the issue. The 12 million people who unlawfully reside the country? Call them “illegal immigrants,” not “undocumented workers,” the pollsters say. I’m sure Ms Brown just wanted to demonstrate how “smart” the Democrats have become on the amnesty issue but in that attempt she has also revealed an incredible level of cynicism on their part. Here is more of Brown revealing how the Democrats are attempting to fool the public through the cynical use of nice sounding words: Strip out the empathy, too. Democrats used to offer immigrants “an earned path to citizenship” so hardworking people trying to support their families could “come out of the shadows.” To voters, that sounded like a gift, the operatives concluded.  Now, Democrats emphasize that it’s “unacceptable” to allow 12 million people to live in America illegally and that the government must “require” them to register and “get right with the law.” That means three things: “Obey our laws, learn our language and pay our taxes” — or face deportation.  Right about now I can almost hear Democrat officials hissing to each other about how Brown was way too upfront in revealing their attempt to sell the amnesty snake oil to the public. And now Brown names names: President Barack Obama uses the buzzwords. So does the congressional leadership. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), author of the Democratic immigration plan, scolds advocates who refer to illegal immigrants as “undocumented workers.”  “Buzzwords.” Which means the folks who use them like Obama and Schumer are also amnesty snake oil salesmen. Thanks for that revelation, Carrie. However even these meaningless snake oil buzzwords are a bit too much for some of the liberals to swallow such as amnesty advocate Frank Sharry: Even then, the poll-tested words and phrases will only go so far if Democrats fail to exert discipline and unify behind the get-tough message. And at this point, not all immigration reform advocates have bought into the rhetorical hard line, which aims squarely at winning the political center. Even Sharry, who spearheaded the effort, declines the advice of pollsters to excise “undocumented workers” from his lexicon, saying it feels too much like it plays into conservative efforts to “dehumanize” immigrants. Of course, what article about the cynical manipulation of emotions via buzzwords would be complete without the input of the logic-denying Democrat advisor, Drew Westen ? “When [voters] hear ‘undocumented worker,’ they hear a liberal euphemism, it sounds to them like liberal code,” said Drew Westen, a political consultant who has helped Sharry hone the message through dial testing. “I am often joking with leaders of progressive organizations and members of Congress, ‘If the language appears fine to you, it is probably best not to use it. You are an activist, and by definition, you are out of the mainstream.’” Have you noticed how Democrats have begun mouthing words in support of border security before amnesty can be considered? All a poll driven act according to Brown’s revelation: …Podesta and Sharry assembled a roster of boldfaced Democratic pollsters — Stan Greenberg, Celinda Lake, Guy Molyneux — to figure out how the party would ever get away from one of the most devastating GOP lines of attack, that a comprehensive immigration plan amounted to “amnesty” for illegals. The results made Greenberg a convert. His surveys of swing districts in 2006 and 2007 concluded that Democrats took a political risk by discussing immigration. Greenberg thought frustration with immigrants would spawn an environment similar to the welfare backlash in the 1990s and that Democrats needed to get tough on border security before talking about citizenship.   But polling that Greenberg, Lake and Molyneux conducted in 2008 proved to Greenberg that Democrats could talk in a way that won over voters. It needed to sound tough and pragmatic, but not overly punitive, the pollsters said. The message beat the amnesty charge in their polling. Got that? The call for border security is just a poll driven act on the part of the Democrats?   More poll driven pretension: The most significant shift in language involves the path to citizenship. Pollsters determined that Democrats sounded as though they wanted to reward illegal immigrants , even though lawmakers almost always laid out that requirements and delays that would precede citizenship. “It comes back to this idea: We give permission; we set the terms; it’s under our control; and if you meet those conditions, you are us, welcome to America,” Westen said of the new frame . The “new frame” i.e. the “new act.”   So thank you, Carrie Budoff Brown, for revealing the incredible level of “fool the public” cynicism on the part of the Democrats on the issue of amnesty. It was probably unintentional on your part to reveal so much but thanks anyway.

Read more here:
Did Politico Inadvertently Reveal Too Much Detail About Cynical Democrat Sales Pitch for Amnesty?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,