andrea nill: Page 1
The ad appears to be vaguely referencing the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act which Reid attached to the defense reauthorization bill last month as an amendment. The DREAM Act wouldn’t give undocumented students special tuition rates, but it would eliminate a federal provision that penalizes states that provide in-state tuition without regard to immigration status. Angle’s ad doesn’t mention that it would also allow certain undocumented immigrant youth who were brought to the U.S. by their parents at a young age to eventually obtain legal permanent status by enlisting in the military or attending a university. A June 2010 national poll of 1,008 adults revealed that 70 percent of voters support the DREAM Act, across party lines.
1. As I stated at the Angle ad link, she should have run it by NumbersUSA or some other group first, because, unfortunately, Nill is correct in a technical sense: the DREAM Act itself wouldn't give "special tuition rates".
2. However, where Nill is misleading is with that same Orwellian sentence containing "special tuition rates". Federal law currently says that states can't give illegal aliens a rate that they don't give to citizens . The DREAM Act would do away with that, letting states give illegal aliens a better rate than citizens. The bill itself wouldn't give illegal aliens a better rate, it would just allow states to do that with impunity. What she says above is like saying, "this bill wouldn't raise the speed limit, it would just eliminate the speed limit and let people go as fast as they want". Needless to say, giving illegal aliens a better rate than citizens is openly anti-American and shows how little loyalty those Americans who support the DREAM Act have to their fellow citizens.
3. Nill doesn't tell her readers that the "federal provision that penalizes states" has not ever as far as I know been enforced; see this, which references this. The reason for that is federal corruption: those running the Department of Homeland Security are too corrupt to enforce the laws they're required to enforce.
4. The "poll" she mentions (from First Focus) was more of an advocacy poll designed to obtain a skewed result, and the poll question misleads about the DREAM Act. No respectable polling organization would ever ask such a blatantly biased question; most would try to hide it better. Take a look at the incredibly biased question that was asked at . That question includes, "To earn legal status, students must have come to the U.S. when they were very young." In fact, the DREAM Act that Harry Reid was pushing would be open to those who claimed they came here at 15 years or younger. Does anyone think 15 years of age is "very young"?
 Title 8, Chapter 14, Sec. 1623, link:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.
Rupert Murdoch of Fox News testified before Congress today in support of comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty) and in support of massive immigration in general. And, two studies he used to buttress his argument are from the leftwing, Obama-linked Center for American Progress.
News Corporation CEO Rupert Murdoch said he supports amnesty for “law abiding” illegal immigrants because as legal residents they can help the nation’s economy by adding to “our tax base.” He also said he supports securing the border to prevent more illegal immigrants from entering the United States.
Most illegal aliens are low-skilled workers, meaning they couldn't help that much and in most cases would end up costing more (see the 1997 NAS study, not yet discussed here). And, as with most others who are weak on or supporters of amnesty, he throws out the secure the border bone.
"While supporting complete and proper closure of all our borders to future illegal immigrants, our partnership (the Partnership for a New American Economy) advocates reform that gives a path to citizenship for responsible, law-abiding immigrants who are in the U.S. today without proper authority..."
It is nonsense to talk of expelling 12 million people,” testified Murdoch. “Not only is it impractical, it is cost prohibitive."
Murdoch cited a study that gauged “the price of mass deportation at $285 billion over five years,” which amounts to $57 billion per year, adding that “there are better ways to spend our money.”
“A full path to legalization--requiring unauthorized immigrants to register, undergo a security check, pay taxes and learn English--would bring these immigrants out of a shadow economy and add to our tax base,” said Murdoch.
He continued, “According to one study, a path to legalization would contribute an estimated $1.5 trillion to the Gross Domestic Product over 10 years.”
1. In the first paragraph he's advocating for amnesty.
2. In the second paragraph, he's engaging in the deportations false choice fallacy.
3. The study referenced in the third paragraph is a study from the Center for American Progress that uses a highly flawed methodology to arrive at that figure.
4. In the fourth paragraph, he uses the living in the shadows canard and also doesn't reveal the huge flaws in comprehensive immigration reform. Those include the background checks either taking somewhere between five to ten years or those checks being cursory at best. And, once again, the great majority of newly-legalized illegal aliens would owe little taxes and some might even get a tax refund of some kind.
5. The last paragraph references another flawed Center for American Progress study.
You'd think that relying on two bogus CAP studies would be enough to earn him a break from his new friends, yet Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress writes this (thinkprogress.org/2010/09/30/murdoch-immigration-fox):
Earlier this year, Murdoch indicated that the media should be involved in the push for comprehensive immigration reform. However, Fox News employees don’t seem to agree. The Wonk Room shows that more than any other network, Fox News has repeatedly and consistently advocated against immigration reform and referred to Murdoch's proposal as "amnesty."
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) called Murdoch out on the blatant contradiction later in the hearing, pointing out, "it does not appear that what you are talking and the way you are discussing it is the way it is discussed on Fox." Murdoch defended his position and his network:
I'm not really that shocked that Nill or Waters would be in favor of Murdoch turning Fox into a propaganda outlet for amnesty. I am, however, just a little shocked that they'd be so overt about it.
And, obviously, the fact that those Murdoch is promoting and helping have no use for him unless he agrees with them 100% probably flew right over his head; he was too distracted by the dollar signs from the fantasy he's promoting.
Earlier today, a gunman took hostages at the Discovery Channel building; the situation has been resolved. We discourage using the actions of someone who's most likely insane to score political points.
"There's a concerted effort behind promoting these kinds of laws on a state-by-state basis by people who have ties to white supremacy groups.. It's been documented. It's not mainstream politics."
Obviously, in her mind effective immigration enforcement isn't "mainstream", despite the fact that the great majority of Americans (i.e., the mainstream) support it. But, it gets worse:
...Sanchez told the newspaper after her speech that she based her accusation on online stories, particularly a blog written by Andrea Nill, an immigration researcher for ThinkProgress, an offshoot of the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Nill wrote that the Immigration Law Reform Institute, the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), helped write the law. The Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled FAIR a hate group, a designation that the organization disputes.
The groups that Sanchez considers credible sources are in fact not very credible at all. Please refer to the dozens of posts at the following links to find out just how little credence one should give to the opinions of those listed:
From this (bolding added):
Immigrant-rights groups sought to tap some of the "tea party" thunder Thursday by using the anti-tax-and-spending movement's nationwide protests to argue illegal immigrants must be legalized because they are eager to pay their full taxes... "Here there are people who don't want to pay taxes, and we're saying there are all these people who want to carry the load and we don't allow them to," said Mary Moreno, a spokeswoman for the Center for Community Change. She led a delegation that delivered five boxes of blank tax forms to a Capitol Hill office as a symbol of all the tax money left uncollected because illegal immigrants have not been legalized... "Oh man. How do they come up with this? They won't be real Americans if they love taxes," said Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican who rallied with the tea partiers later in the day... He said the IRS won’t turn down any extra revenue from illegal immigrants who want to pay it now, but also doubted legalization would be a good deal for American taxpayers...
King is wrong on both accounts. The truth is that an overwhelming majority of Americans recognize the need to do their part in contributing to the nation’s welfare in the form of taxes. Eighty percent of Americans support maintaining spending levels on domestic programs such as education, health care, and Social Security over lowering taxes. Moreover, a new New York Times/CBS News poll finds that most Americans, 62 percent, regard the income taxes they personally pay as fair, regardless of political partisanship, ideology, or income level.
While King is definitely an anti-tax maven, his quote above was almost certainly meant at least partly in jest, along the lines of complaining about lines at the DMV. Obviously, that possibility flew over Nill's head, resulting in her linking to various immigration economics pseudo-studies that fail to take into account all the costs of comprehensive immigration reform.
Roy Beck of Numbers USA attended yesterday's pro-illegal immigration march, and you can watch the reception he received on the video at peekURL.com/v41a4yc which is also attached right or below. On the video, persons dressed as mimes surrounded him as he attempted to speak to the camera and blew whistles at him in an attempt to shut him up. Not only that, but from their posting about the day's events (link):
After threatening Roy, the mimes were ordered by Park Police to remain between 7th and 14th streets. Then they huddled and one ran to Park Police claiming one of Roy's African American bodyguards had assaulted her. Park Police were forced to investigate and arrest the bodyguard pending investigation. You have seen the videos folks, the same ones we will provide to the police to clear this situation. Both Chad and Roy have been shoved, bumped, whistled and screamed at, etc. yet have not pushed back.
While at least one of those involved was wearing a Service Employees International Union shirt, the bit with the mimes was organized by the Center for New Community. In the video, Beck holds up a card from the CNC's far-left, anti-white "Imagine2050" campaign; the card says:
"Bigots are here to debate immigration/make like a mime/don't debate anti-immigrant trolls"
The mimes and their handlers are, not to put too fine a point on it, fascists. They don't support the American system of debate but instead seek to silence those who disagree. Needless to say, this is how the far-left operates throughout the U.S., whether they're disrupting public meetings, seeking to criminalize speech, or relatively minor things like referring to mainstream rightwing radio as "hate radio". And, of course, many bloggers on both the right and the left have a war against "trolls", where they too seek to silence those who disagree.
While it's good that Beck showed up for their event and may have shown some who aren't familiar with this issue who the other side is, attending street protests is largely a worthless endeavor. The much more effective way to do things is - of course - outlined on the question authority page.
UPDATE: Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress has the mimes' side of things at
thinkprogress.org/2010/03/22/roy-beck-numbersusa. One of the mimes who pressed charges is Lena Graber, who may be the same person who's a policy associate at the National Immigration Forum, a considered-mainstream group (http://www.immigrationforum.org/about/staff). While some of the things she says might cause a finder of fact to assume the bodyguard is in the wrong, other things cast a great deal of doubt on her statements. Namely, Nill says: "Graber explains that she and four other mimes followed Beck and his crew around for four hours in an effort to prevent Beck from picking a fight with demonstrators..." Obviously, Beck wasn't going to "pick a fight" with anyone; he's not a thug like they are.
Then, Nill says:
Another witness who did not want to be named confirmed Graber’s account and described the mimes’ behavior as “completely whimsical in nature — never threatening.” Both Graber and the witness confirmed that the "hateful whistles" were actually just small plastic whistles in the shape of a soccer ball.
What they were doing is trying to intimidate Beck and silence him; watch the video. They're little fascists, just like all the other little fascists throughout history in spirit if not in deed. The others, of course, went well beyond whistles, but it's not hard at all to see those like Lena Graber going further if given the chance. And, Andrea Nill is enabling their behavior.
In May, 2008, Barack Obama smeared Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh, falsely claiming that hate crimes against Hispanics had "doubled" the year before. In fact, they only went up 7.8%. Not only that, but they've decreased as a percentage of the Hispanic population between 1995 and 2006.
Given that, you might not expect Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress to write the following, unless you were familiar with that site and her work. In that case, you - like me - would realize just how truth-challenged both she and the others associated with that site are. Referring to a new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center (perhaps more on that later), she writes (thinkprogress.org/2010/03/03/dobbs-splc-hate-groups):
While campaigning in 2008, Obama himself accused Dobbs of "ginning things up" to such an extent that hate crimes against Latinos soared.
The last sentence links links to the contemporaneous Huffington Post report at huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/23/
obama-rush-limbaugh-lou-d_n_103315.html which, of course, doesn't even hint at how much Obama was lying.
If Nill had even a smidgen of intellectual honesty she would note that Obama lied. As it is, I strongly suspect that her use of "soared" instead of what Obama said ("doubled") is an outright attempt to deceive her readers but at the same time not raise red flags by repeating something so obviously false.
Hilda Solis puts interests of immigrants, illegal aliens ahead of U.S. workers, sounds just like George Bush - 12/17/09
Various sources  have recently called for moratoriums on various kinds of immigration and increased immigration enforcement in order to free up jobs for Americans. (Note: I tried to shame the Center for American Progress over this issue way back in March, but I didn't get any help with it).
In response to the recent calls, Hilda Solis of the Department of Labor has shown that - while she's probably interested in workers in general - she has little concern for putting the interests of American workers ahead of the interests of illegal aliens and legal immigrants. Not only that, but in so doing she said something that George W Bush or Michael Chertoff could have said. Speaking at CAP, she said the following which the reader is encouraged to read in the voices of either Bush or Chertoff (video here, writeup thinkprogress.org/2009/12/17/solis-moratorium):
I think we’d have a big shortage of workers out there and I think as we move through this decade, we’re going to see people retiring from different types of jobs…so who is going to help fill those positions?
You would probably see towns shutting down, communities shutting down. You’d see second and third industries being affected – restaurant industries, service sectors industries where immigrants tend to work and be found. It would also impact the current ability to put food on your table because if you don’t have a certain number of people out there doing jobs that others wouldn’t want to do, then how are we going to provide the sustenance we need for all our American families?
March's open letter (link above) and the question I wanted Janet Napolitano to be asked at CAP are designed to discredit that organization and the administration officials who put the interests of illegal aliens ahead of the interests of U.S. citizens. It's unfortunate that despite promoting both in various forums I was unable to get any help with either.
In response [to a protest discouraging participation in the Census], the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO) has started using the Bible to target religious Latinos with a different message: What would Jesus do?
NALEO is handing out posters that illustrate the arrival of Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem. NALEO explains that the Gospel of Luke indicates that the reason Jesus was born in Bethlehem is because Joseph and Mary were fulfilling their civic duty by returning to the town to be counted by the Roman census. A poster printed by NALEO reads: “This is how Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary participated in the Census.” Nick Kimball, spokesman at the Commerce Department (which oversees the Census Bureau), said that the government played no role in creating the posters.
NALEO has at least one, albeit minor link to the Mexican government, and the reason they want as many Latinos to participate in the Census is obvious: they want to obtain even more race-based political power. And, they're twisting religion to their corrupt ends.
Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress offers "Report: CNBC Was Considering Hiring Dobbs Until Latino Groups Pushed Back" (thinkprogress.org/2009/12/05/dobbs-cnbc-nogales). Neither she nor those in her general sphere are that credible and would want to inflate their power as much as possible, so take this with a large grain of salt:
(National Hispanic Media Coalition) President Alex Nogales told ThinkProgress today that CNBC was in fact talking with (Lou Dobbs) and that his hiring was, at least in part, thwarted by the same coalition of Latino, civil rights, and media-watchdog groups that successfully campaigned to get Dobbs off CNN airwaves...
When the New York Times reported that CNBC was in negotiations with Dobbs, many of these same civil rights groups chose to similarly and quickly pressure CNBC. The groups, in a letter, warned CNBC that such a move “would be a clear demonstration that CNBC is willing to use its airwaves to promote hate.” They “respectfully” requested the network “refrain” from hiring Dobbs.
Nogales says he reached out with the groups’ concerns to Executive Vice President of Diversity for NBC Universal, Paula Madison, and informed her that his group had signed the letter and she should expect all the major Latino civil rights advocacy organizations and their allies to do the same. Nogales brought up the $30 billion pending deal between Comcast and General Electric on the acquisition of NBC Universal, pointing out that an ugly public battle would not be in NBC’s best interest. According to Nogales, he received a call one hour later from Mark Hoffman, President of CNBC, extending his sincere apologies and assuring Nogales that CNBC would not be offering Dobbs a job. Nogales says that CNBC was in fact talking with Dobbs, though it was unclear whether the two parties had reached an accord before Hoffman contacted him.
She then quotes Nogales crowing "we’re showing our power by collaborating with other groups and putting pressure on networks to do the right business thing".
This proves my point about how Dobbs supporters should approach his recent supposed flip-flop. Turning on him helps those racial power groups that want to keep the other side's views off the air.
Andrea Nill of Think Progress smears Joe Arpaio, gives false impression using bogus quote - 10/05/09
According to the Phoenix News Times, (Sheriff Joe Arpaio) appeared on KTAR 92.3 FM’s Jay Lawrence Show last night vowing to continue operating his "Hispanic-hunting dragnets," even if it means driving undocumented immigrants back across the border himself:
That's followed by a quote from Arpaio, and if you're like me you probably thought "Hispanic-hunting dragnets" might be a quote from Arpaio as well. Whether Nill meant to give that impression or not, it's false. That quote is the characterization of Arpaio's 287g street sweeps as given at  by an Arpaio opponent. Based on the title of Nill's post and her past statements I'm leaning towards the possibility that she was trying to fool her readers into thinking Arpaio had said that. Note also that she's lying about what Arpaio says he intends to do; at  he says "I'll bring 'em [illegal aliens] myself to the border". In Nill's title that's morphed into him deporting them; those aren't necessarily the same thing.
Immigration Policy Ctr: U.S. lost Olympic Games bid due to "anti-visitor policy", "broken immigration system" - 10/02/09
Today's "Tie Every Current Event to Your Agenda No Matter How Tenuously" award goes to the Immigration Policy Center, which blames the failure of the U.S. to bring the Olympics home to Chicago on our immigration policies (link). Per a press release:
"A litany of voices have been warning for years that the U.S. is slowly adopting an anti-visitor policy that is harming business, higher education and families... Stories in the press and report after report have all highlighted how our broken immigration system is hampering our nation's ability to attract the best and the brightest and stay competitive with other nations around the world."
1. There indeed has been some sort of tightening of visa requirements in order to reduce the possibility of terrorists jetting in, however, any idea that Obama wouldn't have made sure that as many people as possible could travel to Chicago is absurd.
2. The system is broken canard and the rest aren't usually used for issues relating to tourism but for actual immigrants (and illegal aliens); the IPC is repurposing it for their argument (such as it is) or just has it as a macro.
UPDATE: This story has also spread to other supporters of massive/illegal immigration, and it appears to have started at least in the MSM with Michelle Higgins of the New York Times with this oft-quoted passage (link):
Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, in the question-and-answer session following Chicago’s official presentation, pointed out that entering the United States can be "a rather harrowing experience."
CAP promotes benefits of states, politicians profiting from illegal immigration (Census, Andrea Nill) - 08/10/09
Andrea Nill of the Center for American Progress offers "Why Counting Undocumented Immigrants In The 2010 Census Counts For A Lot" (wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/08/10/immigration-census-bureau), a through-the-looking-glass post listing all the wonderful ways that states and localities can make out like bandits from counting illegal aliens in the Census and using their population in apportioning Congressional representation:
...the census serves many other purposes, namely the allocation of scarce federal resources for states and localities. Census data is used to distribute federal funding and Community Development Block Grants that benefit all residents. In a recently released report, the Drum Major Institute (DMI) shows that not counting undocumented immigrants would lead to inaccurate demographic information and result in costly mistakes in infrastructure, education, and healthcare planning...
Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress misleads about Joe the Plumber immigration comments at tea party - 07/06/09
I believe in making sure our country is safe first. I believe we need to spend a little more on illegal immigrants. Get them the hell out of our damn country and close the borders down. We can do it. We’ve got the greatest military in the world and you’re telling me we can’t close our borders? - That’s just ridiculous.
Andrea Nill of ThinkProgress offers a discussion of Michael Savage using hyperbole and, rather than admitting that he's correct to a good extent she makes several misleading statements (wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/23/california-immigration-michael-savage).
Casey Sanchez/SPLC, Frank Sharry, Andrea Nill/CAP smear FAIR over non-existent connection (Dave Bennion) - 06/17/09
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has launched its most irresponsible attack to date against the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The SPLC claims that Shawna Forde, the alleged killer of a little girl and her father during an Arizona home invasion, had ties to FAIR. Although no association exists -- or ever has -- between Ms. Forde and FAIR, the SPLC and organizations advocating mass amnesty and open borders have used this tragedy to fuel their on-going smear campaign against FAIR and other immigration policy organizations in order to suppress free and open debate about immigration policy in the United States... FAIR has no association with Shawna Forde. "Ms. Forde is not and never was an employee, member, activist, or donor of FAIR and most certainly has never been authorized to speak on behalf of our organization," stated Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "Ms. Forde misrepresented herself as a spokesperson for FAIR in a 2006 appearance on KYVE-TV in Yakima, Washington, and the producers of the program were remiss in failing to authenticate her false claims."
The SPLC report from Casey Sanchez is at . It was updated after it was originally posted and they acknowledge the above press release; there may or may not have been other changes. In its current form, the SPLC post doesn't claim that she was a member, only that she represented herself as a member and so on. At the very least, the SPLC post is an example of incredibly bad journalism:
Contacted by Hatewatch, Enrique Cerna, the host of the show and an executive producer, said it’s difficult to remember all the production details of a segment produced three years ago. Still, he said his producers had contacted FAIR, asking for a representative to appear on the show. That representative cancelled at the last minute and was replaced by Forde, who identified herself as a FAIR official. “We wouldn’t have identified her with that organization if she hadn’t said she was speaking on their behalf,” said Cerna.
Obviously, Cerna should have verified with FAIR that she was able to speak on their behalf rather than simply taking her word for it.
Shawna Forde, arrested as a suspect in a deadly home invasion in Arizona, has ties to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), an anti-immigrant group classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Hat tip to http://TonyHerrera.com for finding this 2006 video.
She has no ties; Sharry is lying.