Thursday, February 17, 2011

DREAM for students is a NIGHTMARE for Extremists



Public opinion was solicited in Annapolis on Feb 16, 2011, regarding a bill to permit any Maryland resident to attend college and pay in-state tuition, regardless of immigration status.


Maryland IAF brought dozens of representatives to the state capitol to support the bill.


And there was opposition. Extremist opposition.


Those giving testimony against Maryland's DREAM Act include groups, who speak the language of division and exclusion. 


One such group, HELP SAVE MARYLAND, has been declared a "nativist extremist group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center.


For coverage of the Feb 16 2011 Senate Committee hearings see the post at MarylandReporter:

In-state tuition for illegal immigrants: A dream for some, a nightmare for others – MarylandReporter.com

For the Southern Poverty Law Center listing of Rockville based HELP SAVE MARYLAND as a nativist/extremist group, here is the link:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2009/spring/sinister-intentions/nativist-extremis

For a listing of Maryland politicians who have associated themselves with the extremist HELP SAVE MARYLAND, here is the link:

http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2009/03/help-save-maryland-named.html


For a link to Washington Post coverage - which suggests a compromise on the bill is likely:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/16/AR2011021606279.html?sid=ST2011021606358

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Connie, You are not in Kansas Anymore


From ThinkProgress . . . link below


KS GOP Rep. Connie O’Brien Says She Can Tell Who Is ‘Illegal’ Because They Have ‘The Olive Complexion’


One week ago, the Kansas House Federal and State Committee held a hearing about in-state tuition being granted to the children of undocumented immigrants, which has been the policy in the state since 2004.

Speaking in favor of repealing the law, Rep. Connie O’Brien (R-KS) began telling an anecdote at the hearing about how her son had difficulty in getting financial assistance to attend college. She explained that she took her son to a financial aid office, and as she was waiting in line, she believed there was a girl waiting in line with them who was “not originally from this country.” Fellow committee member Rep. Sean Gatewood (D-KS) asked O’Brien how she knew this student was “illegal.” O’Brien replied that she knew because the student “wasn’t black, she wasn’t Asian, and she had the olive complexion”:

[. . .] 

Kansas Democratic Party lawmakers have asked her to apologize. For her part, O’Brien counters that she’s been told she’s “got olive complexion” and that she’s not going to apologize until she’s “had time to think.”


Here is a link to the ThinkProgress item, where you can here Representative O'Brien's comment.

ThinkProgress » KS GOP Rep. Connie O’Brien Says She Can Tell Who Is ‘Illegal’ Because They Have ‘The Olive Complexion’

Thursday, February 10, 2011

FOX NEWS INSIDER: Stuff Is Just Made Up



“They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.” This, from a Fox News Insider.



. . . as reported by MediaMatters. Here are parts of the MM piece (with a link below, to the entire MM blog article) 


FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”


February 10, 2011 7:20 am ET by Eric Boehlert

[. . .] 

“I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”
[. . .]
a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Matters confirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation, virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate without theslightest regard for fairness or fact checking.   
“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”
[. . .]
“They say one thing and do another. They insist on maintaining this charade, this façade, that they’re balanced or that they’re not right-wing extreme propagandist,” says the source. But it’s all a well-orchestrated lie, according this former insider. It’s a lie that permeates the entire Fox News culture and one that staffers and producers have to learn quickly in order to survive professionally.
“You have to work there for a while to understand the nods and the winks,” says the source. “And God help you if you don’t because sooner or later you’re going to get burned.”
The source explains:
“Like any news channel there’s lot of room for non-news content. The content that wasn’t ‘news,’ they didn’t care what we did with as long as it was amusing or quirky or entertaining;  as along as it brought in eyeballs.  But anything—anything--that was a news story you had to understand what the spin should be on it. If it was a big enough story it was explained to you in the morning [editorial] meeting. If it wasn’t explained, it was up to you to know the conservative take on it. There’s a conservative take on every story no matter what it is. So you either get told what it is or you better intuitively know what it is.”
[. . .] 
“When I first got there back in the day, and I don’t know how they indoctrinate people now, but back in the day when they were “training” you, as it were, they would say, ‘Here’s how we’re different.’ They’d say if there is an execution of a condemned man at midnight and there are all the live truck outside the prison and all the lives shots.  CNN would go, ‘Yes, tonight John Jackson, 25 of Mississippi, is going to die by lethal injection for the murder of two girls.’ MSNBC  would say the same thing. 
“We would come out and say, ‘Tonight, John Jackson who kidnapped an innocent two year old, raped her, sawed her head off and threw it in the school yard, is going to get the punishment that a jury of his peers thought he should get.’ And they say that’s the way we do it here. And you’re going , alright, it’s a bit of an extreme example but it’s something to think about. It’s not unreasonable.
"When you first get in they tell you we’re a bit of a counterpart to the screaming left wing lib media. So automatically you have to buy into the idea that the other media is howling left-wing. Don’t even start arguing that or you won’t even last your first day. 
For the first few years it was let’s take the conservative take on things. And then after a few years it evolved into, well it’s not just the conservative take on things, we’re going to take the Republican take on things which is not necessarily in lock step with the conservative point of view.
“And then two, three, five years into that it was, we’re taking the Bush line on things, which was different than the GOP. We were a Stalin-esque mouthpiece.  It was just what Bush says goes on our channel. And by that point it was just totally dangerous.  Hopefully most people understand how dangerous it is for a media outfit to be a straight, unfiltered mouthpiece for an unchecked president.”
[. . .]
“It was a kick ass mentality too,” says the former Fox News insider. “It was relentless and it never went away. If one controversy faded, goddamn it they would find another one. They were in search of these points of friction real or imagined. And most of them were imagined or fabricated. You always have to seem to be under siege. You always have to seem like your values are under attack. The brain trust just knew instinctively which stories to do, like the War on Christmas.”
[. . .]
“People assume you need a license to call yourself a news channel. You don’t. So because they call themselves Fox News, people probably give them a pass on a lot of things,” says the source.
[. . .]
“I don’t think people understand that it’s an organization that’s built and functions by intimidation and bullying, and its goal is to prop up and support Republicans and the GOP and to knock down Democrats. People tend think that stuff that’s on TV is real, especially under the guise of news. You’d think that people would wise up, but they don’t.”
[. . .] 
If you take on Fox, they’ll kick you in the ass,” says the source. “I’m sure most [journalists]  know that. It’s not worth being  Swift Boated for your effort,” a reference to  how Fox News traditionally attacks journalists who write, or are perceived to have written, anything negative things about the channel.
The former insider admits to being perplexed in late 2009 when the Obama White House called out Murdoch’s operation as not being a legitimate new source, only to have major Beltway media players rush to the aid of Fox News and admonish the White House for daring to criticize the cable channel.
“That blew me away,” says the source, who stresses the White House’s critique of Fox News “happens to be true.” 

FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

BORN IN THE USA? So What? Birthright Citizenship Under Threat

The Tea Partiers praise the US Constitution - but not all of it.


The Constitution extends citizenship to all born in the US.


But a right-wing movement is in place to deprive citizenship from infants born in the US - if their parents - or it just their mothers? - are not citizens.


Would it be rude to suggest that a push for the constitutional amendment is a Whites-only-please gambit? Let's be fair and wait to see which politicians and pressure groups support this effort.


For recent details - and with more to follow - here is a helpful NY Times link:


Birthright Citizenship Looms as Next Immigration Battle - NYTimes.com