los angeles times

Los Angeles Times

Forever condemned to live in the shadow of what they think of as a real newspaper, the New York Times. Frequently lies or misleads, especially about immigration matters. Has a long-term habit of covering up for L.A. mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; they even continued covering up for his involvement in the radical group MEChA after he'd partly renounced that group.

Last modified Dec 17, 2008
Discussed in (click each link for the full post):

If you oppose illegal immigration, Tim Donnelly isn't on your side (California) - 04/08/14

Tim Donnelly is an extremely long-shot candidate to be California governor. The primary election is June 3, 2014 and then the top two vote getters (i.e., Jerry Brown and either Donnelly or Neel Kashkari) will face off in the general election in November.

LA Times admits Obama is not the "Deporter in Chief" ("High deportation figures are misleading") - 04/03/14

The Los Angeles Times is perhaps even more in favor of illegal immigration and amnesty than their big brother. But, a select few lies are even too much for the L.A. Times.

Cindy Carcamo of L.A. Times has tips on how illegal aliens can skirt our laws - 09/15/13

The establishment media isn't in the habit of offering tips on how American citizens can break the laws. But, when it comes to illegal immigration things change. For instance, MSNBC and Washington Post have offered tips articles on how to hire most-likely illegal day labor. The Los Angeles Times offered something similar to a hot-to guide for those wanting to escape immigration enforcement.

Seema Mehta outrageously lies (Los Angeles Times, Steve King, immigration) - 07/28/13

Think Seema Mehta of the Los Angeles Times is credible? Consider this paragraph from one of her articles [1]:

The best way to help NumbersUSA stop amnesty (immigration, House, FAXes) - 07/14/13

Back in 2007, members of Numbers USA helped block amnesty by sending a million or so FAXes to Congress.

Los Angeles Times misleads about Alabama immigration law - 06/16/11

The Los Angeles Times offers the misleading editorial "Alabama targets immigrant students" [1], which contains at least three (and probably many more) highly misleading statements:

1. The Alabama law isn't designed to go after "immigrants" as the editorial's title says. It's only concerned with illegal aliens.

Supreme Court orders California to release >30,000 prisoners; how much overcrowding due to illegal immigration? (ACLU) - 05/23/11

The US Supreme Court has ordered the state of California to release at least 30,000 state prisoners in order to reduce overcrowding (link, excerpt at [1]). What you probably won't hear from many others is the role that massive immigration - especially of the illegal variety - has played in this matter.

According to a Public Policy Institute of California study, "[i]n 2005, there were 28,279 foreign born adults and 139,419 U.S.-born adults in California prisons". Not all of the former are illegal aliens; in fact, it appears that statistics on the numbers of illegal aliens in California prisons are kept under wraps (but if anyone has a valid cite, leave it in comments). However, most of those foreign born are likely to be low-skilled legal immigrants and a large number of them will be illegal aliens; few of that number are likely to be H1B engineers. And, all of that number could have been prevented from coming here in the first place. Note that Arnold Schwarzenegger put the number of illegal aliens in state prisons at 20,000 but it's not known where he got that number. The Government Accountability Office put the number of illegal aliens in California state prisons at about 27,000 in 2008 [3].

Reducing low-skilled immigration would have gone a long way towards reducing prison overcrowding, and without all that massive immigration we wouldn't have tens of thousands of prisoners set free to roam the streets of California.

UPDATE: Jerry Brown says he's trying to comply with the order without releasing anyone (link):

California now has two weeks to produce a plan that would reduce its prison population by more than 33,000 inmates within two years. [Matthew Cate, secretary for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation] said the state could ask a federal three-judge panel for more time to reach the lower inmate number. He said Brown’s proposal to shift thousands of state prisoners to county jails would reduce the state’s prison population by about 30,000 inmates over the next four years.

So, while the outcome isn't clear, I might be wrong about tens of thousands of prisoners being released to roam the streets. In any case, we wouldn't have the problem in the first place without massive, especially illegal, immigration.

Also, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a friend of the court brief in the case and issues a triumphant press release at [4]. As discussed at the last link, the ACLU is a very strong supporter of illegal immigration; they helped the state get into the current mess.

UPDATE 2: It's worth noting that Sonia Sotomayor was on the wrong side, and the ruling was 5-4. See the link for who's to blame for her making it to the Supreme Court.

5/29/11 UPDATE: CA state senator Sharon Runner says (link):

"there are 20,000 illegal inmates [she means illegal aliens] that the federal government should be taking care of and they’re not. If they take over those 20 thousand illegal inmates, at least we’d be halfway to what the court has ordered."

And, from this:

Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, R-Hesperia, this week sent a "2010 invoice" for $885,039,426 to President Barack Obama asking him to pay up or take custody of 17,000 illegal immigrants from state prisons.

...Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein has also sought the reimbursement from the federal government through a reauthorization bill. It would provide $950 million for each of the fiscal years 2012 through 2015 to carry out the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (note: see SCAAP).

...In 2010, SCAAP doled out a roughly $400 million to 850 cities, counties and states, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonpartisan research organization.

..."The state has spent over $885 million to house these inmates, but last year we got reimbursed only $88 million," Donnelly said. "That's less than 10 cents for every dollar spent."

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation holds in custody 16,829 inmates who are under U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement hold.

An additional 3,844 are under "potential" ICE hold - deemed possible illegal entrants who have not come into contact with Department of Homeland Security and have no record in the federal database.

-------
[1] From the Los Angeles Times article:

[U.S. Supreme Court] Justices upheld an order from a three-judge panel in California that called for releasing 38,000 to 46,000 prisoners. Since then, the state has transferred about 9,000 state inmates to county jails. As a result, the total prison population is now about 32,000 more than the capacity limit set by the panel.

Justice (Anthony Kennedy), speaking for the majority, said California's prisons had "fallen short of minimum constitutional requirements" because of overcrowding. As many as 200 prisoners may live in gymnasium, he said, and as many as 54 prisoners share a single toilet.

Kennedy insisted that the state had no choice but to release more prisoners. The justices, however, agreed that California officials should be given more time to make the needed reductions.

In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia called the ruling "staggering" and "absurd."

He said the high court had repeatedly overruled the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for ordering the release of individual prisoners. Now, he said, the majority were ordering the release of "46,000 happy-go-lucky felons." He added that "terrible things are sure to happen as a consequence of this outrageous order." Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with him.

In a separate dissent, Justice (Samuel Alito). and Chief Justice (John Roberts) said the ruling conflicted with a federal law intended to limit the power of federal judges to order a release of prisoners.

[2] ppic.org/content/pubs/cacounts/CC_208KBCC.pdf
Note that their total for the number of state prisoners as of 2005 is almost 168,000, while the LAT says there are currently 142,000. Some of that may be due to shifting prisoners to local facilities, or it could be a matter of apples and oranges. In any case, the percentages are likely to be similar. As I said, it's difficult to find statistics on these matters.

[3] (added later) Per the GAO (gao.gov/new.items/d11187.pdf):

[T]he total number of SCAAP illegal aliens incarcerated in California state prisons in fiscal year 2008 was about 27,000, which accounted for about 10 percent of all inmate days.

That might again be an apples and oranges number, but it's the closest I've found to a definitive cite.

[4] aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights/
aclu-lens-supreme-court-orders-
california-reduce-its-prison-population-allevi1

Richard Marosi of LAT pretends: Obama has secured the border so much, Border Patrol agents are falling asleep - 05/02/11

Richard Marosi of the Los Angeles Times offers the sleepy "Plunge in border crossings leaves agents fighting boredom/ Arrests of illegal crossers along the Southwest border dropped more than two-thirds from 2000 to 2010, from 1.6 million to 448,000" (link).

Chinese "birthing tourism" houses shut down (temporarily; Los Angeles Times; birthright citizenship) - 03/26/11

Back in 2002, the Los Angeles Times reported on "birth tourism" by Koreans: citizens of Korea temporarily visiting the U.S. in order to give birth and abusing our laws which have been interpreted to grant birthright citizenship.

Now, they have a report on unlicensed "birthing centers" for Chinese nationals that were recently shut down in San Gabriel (east of Pasadena). Per them ("'Birthing tourism' center in San Gabriel shut down" by Ching-Ching Ni, link):

Southern California has become a hub of so-called birthing tourism. Operators of such centers tend to try to blend in, attracting as little attention as possible.

But on quiet, residential Palm Avenue, neighbors had noticed an unusual number of pregnant women going in and out, and some complained about noise.

On March 8, code enforcement officials shut down three identical four-bedroom townhouses functioning as an unlicensed birthing center.

...Most of the women go back to China after giving birth. But they know their children can return easily in the future to enjoy such benefits as free public education.

That bothers some of those living near the San Gabriel center.

"If they lived here, I don't mind," said Duke Trinh, who lives a few houses down. "If they are running a business, I don't want them here. It's not fair for us if [the mothers] go back to China and later send their kids here for education — because they don't pay taxes, we do."

Anna Gorman, Nicholas Riccardi: supporting illegal activity is mainstream, tolerant (Los Angeles Times) - 08/02/10

Anna Gorman and Nicholas Riccardi of the Los Angeles Times offer an article with a title more appropriate for an (explicit) advocacy publication: "Arizona was once tolerant of illegal immigrants. What happened?" (link).

Taitz uninvited from tea party event; does Seema Mehta know what a "falsehood" is? - 04/14/10

Seema Mehta of the Los Angeles Times brings word (link) that Orly Taitz has been disinvited from a tea parties event in Pleasanton on Thursday. And, that was done after politicians who were to appear at the event complained. Taitz is a piece of work, so it's perfectly understandable why Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore wouldn't want to share a stage with her (even if they say they had nothing to do with her being booted from the event).

That said, this bit from Seema Mehta's article jumps out (bolding added):

Taitz is best known for her crusade to prove Obama was born in Kenya and not Hawaii, a falsehood that sprang to life during the 2008 presidential campaign and that most voters and mainstream Republicans reject. But she has also been creating waves in the state Republican Party.

In order for what Taitz claims to be a "falsehood", the claim that Obama was not born in Kenya would need to have been definitively proven. While there's an excellent chance that he was in fact born in Hawaii, all of the evidence so far provided does not add up to definitive proof: all of that evidence has various flaws.

That doesn't mean that he was born somewhere other than Hawaii, it just means that it hasn't been definitively proven. To say otherwise would be to engage in childlike thinking, pretending that just because FactCheck says something it must be true, despite the fact that they've been caught in lies about this and other issues.

And, to say otherwise would be to assist a useful fiction, that where Obama was born has been definitively proven. The establishment works night and day to smear anyone who has any questions - just as they smear those who have reasonable questions about 911 - but that doesn't make their claims true. On the other hand, just because they doth protest too much doesn't mean that they're trying to cover something up, but it's not helping.

As for Seema Mehta, I invite her to list below what she considers definitive proof. Then, I'll show you (and hopefully her readers) why she's wrong.

Dan Schnur misleads about USC's misleading poll (Los Angeles Times, immigration) - 04/08/10

A few days ago, I discussed how a new Los Angeles Times / University of Southern California poll was designed to mislead. It not only presented a false choice about immigration, but it made one question deliberately unworkable (denying "emergency room treatment" to illegal aliens) in order to force people to choose one of the other, more amnesty-friendly options.

Now, [1] Dan Schnur of USC takes to the pages of the Los Angeles Times and misleads about the already-misleading poll ("A sea change in attitudes toward illegal immigration?", link, bolding added):

In 1994, Proposition 187 passed with almost 60% of the vote, and polling done by both political parties during subsequent election campaigns has suggested that the state's electorate would continue to support measures to deny a broad range of social services to illegal immigrants. Our new poll, however, found that California voters today are almost evenly divided on the question. Forty-five percent of respondents still support the denial of services -- including public schooling and healthcare to illegal immigrants -- but 47% oppose the idea. This represents a marked shift in public opinion with ramifications for both state and national politics and policy reform efforts.

The poll didn't just ask about "healthcare"; it asked about "any taxpayer funded social services, including emergency room treatment..." That's a much more extreme position than denying non-emergency healthcare, and Dan Schnoor isn't honest enough to reveal it to his readers.

Further, the LAT/USC polling partnership only began in November of last year (link), and the only instances of the emergency treatment question that I can find are for this latest poll. When other polling organizations discuss trends, they do it based on having asked the same exact questions year after year.

Somehow, Daniel Schnur is able to divine a trend based on the data from just one poll.

[1] Per his bio at the LAT link above: "Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC, was communications director for Gov. Pete Wilson and an advisor to the 2000 presidential campaign of U.S. Sen. John McCain."

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner/ LAT / USC poll designed to mislead; has immigration false choice - 04/03/10

A new "American Viewpoint" poll from the Los Angeles Times and the University of Southern California - conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner - can be accessed at gqrr.com/index.php?ID=2437, with a report here. Like others listed in immigration poll, it offers a false choice about the options available to us. These are the only three options that people were given for the "IMMIBAT" question (numbering and results added):

1. Implement stronger enforcement at the border and prohibit those here illegally from benefiting from any taxpayer funded social services, including emergency room treatment and public education for children here illegally. (45 for, 47 against)

2. Implement stronger enforcement at the border and design a temporary worker program that does not grant immigrants legal citizenship, but does allow them to legally work here for a specific period of time and then requires them to return to their country of origin. (70 for, 24 against)

3. Implement stronger enforcement at the border and set up a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants who admit they broke the law, perform community service, pay fines and back taxes and learn English. (67 for, 26 against)

The first, surprisingly-popular choice is completely unrealistic, would be a public safety nightmare, and wouldn't stand up to even the slightest constitutional challenge. And, USC, the LAT, and Greenberg all know that: they're intentionally trying to mislead people.

The second is the "corrupt Republican fantasy program", similar in spirit to plans from George W Bush, Mike Pence, and Helen Krieble. USC, the LAT, and Greenberg aren't telling respondents that such a program would be nearly impossible: those guest workers would be here to stay, especially those who've had U.S. citizen children. We'd trade millions of illegal aliens we can't deport for millions of "guests" who won't go home despite being "required" to do so.

The third is the comprehensive immigration reform choice, with a possible tip of the hat to the recent Chuck Schumer/Lindsey Graham scheme (From their scheme: "They would be required to admit they broke the law and to pay their debt to society by performing community service and paying fines and back taxes. These people would be required to pass background checks and be proficient in English before going to the back of the line of prospective immigrants to earn the opportunity to work toward lawful permanent residence.") It has the flaws listed at the first link in this paragraph and many more, and USC, the LAT, and Greenberg aren't telling respondents about those flaws.

And, USC, the LAT, and Greenberg aren't asking about a fourth plan: attrition. That would involve enforcing the law - but not blocking emergency treatment and the like - in order to reduce the numbers of illegal aliens here over time. Needless to say, polls that are designed to mislead - such as this one - don't ask about plans like that.

Obama meets with black leaders on unemployment, Hispanic leaders on amnesty (+Graham, Schumer) - 03/11/10

Barack Obama met earlier today with two groups with competing interests, even if neither he nor most of the rest of the political establishment would even hint at that (link):

[At a White House meeting earlier today] African-American members of Congress said they told the president that job creation is critical to their communities and that federal resources should be directed toward workforce training, specifically for infrastructure projects.

Unemployment among black Americans was 15.8 percent in February, compared to the overall jobless rate of 9.7 percent nationally.

"We talked about the desperation that we're feeling in our communities throughout the country," Democratic Representative Barbara Lee, head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said on the White House driveway with a phalanx of other lawmakers beside her...

[At a different meeting also earlier today,] Obama spent an hour meeting with officials from immigration advocacy groups who pressed him on an issue that did not feature highly in the president's first year, which was dominated by fixing the economy and healthcare.

"We leave the meeting today feeling hopeful," said Clarissa Martinez de Castro of the National Council of La Raza. "The president took an hour of his time to have a conversation, not to give a speech and that is significant."

She said that "there were commitments made about truly seeing this issue moving forward and the White House getting engaged to help in that process."

As if that wasn't enough, Obama also discussed amnesty plans with Sens. Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham.

UPDATE: Per Peter Nicholas of the Los Angeles Times (link), the latter two gave Obama a three-page "blueprint":

Although details of their blueprint were not released, Graham said the elements included tougher border security, a program to admit temporary immigrant workers and a biometric Social Security card that would prevent people here illegally from getting jobs.

Graham also said the proposal included "a rational plan to deal with the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States." He did not elaborate on what the plan would be. But in a recent interview, he suggested that onerous measures were unrealistic.

"We're not going to mass-deport people and put them in jail, nor should we," Graham said. "But we need a system so they don't get an advantage over others for citizenship."

1. The national/biometric ID part in relation to amnesty is probably news to many commentators, but it's been discussed here for years: here, here, here, here, and so on.

2. The last quote from Graham combines two misleading talking points: deportations false choice and immigration line.

Obama meets with Lindsey Graham, Chuck Schumer, wants amnesty bill - 03/05/10

Peter Nicholas of the Los Angeles Times offers "Obama looking to give new life to immigration reform" (link):

[At a meeting on Monday], Obama and members of his Domestic Policy Council outlined ways to resuscitate the (comprehensive immigration reform aka amnesty) effort in a White House meeting with two senators -- Democrat (Charles Schumer) of New York and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina -- who have spent months trying to craft a bill.

According to a person familiar with the meeting, the White House may ask Schumer and Graham to at least produce a blueprint that could be turned into legislative language.

The basis of a bill would include a path toward citizenship for the 10.8 million people living in the U.S. illegally. Citizenship would not be granted lightly, the White House said. Undocumented workers would need to register, pay taxes and pay a penalty for violating the law. Failure to comply might result in deportation.

Nick Shapiro, a White House spokesman, said the president's support for an immigration bill, which would also include improved border security, was "unwavering."

Participants in the White House gathering also pointed to an immigration rally set for March 21 in Washington as a way to spotlight the issue and build needed momentum.

1. The "lightly" part is bogus; "register, pay taxes and pay a penalty for violating the law" is stock boilerplate and doesn't represent anything tougher than all the other bogus plans put forth in the past. Note also that those who didn't step easily through their big hoop "might" be deported. They might as well just come right out and say this is a sham that would encourage more illegal immigration and with little intent of enforcement.

2. This could be (and probably is) just an attempt by the Obama admin to placate Hispanic leaders.

3. Schumer says he has trouble finding Republicans to support him other than Graham; he met with Janet Napolitano yesterday to seek her help and afterwards in a statement said, "We just need a second Republican."

4. There are probably a good number more illegal aliens in the U.S. than the figure given as a fact by Nicholas.

5. The March 21 event will feature foreign citizens who are here illegally marching through our streets in a show of force, demanding that we change our laws to suit them. And, all those referenced above are supporting that.

"Full Rights for Immigrants Coalition" files complaint over "proud racist" councilman; Ann Simmons fails to note material fact - 02/10/10

Ann Simmons of the Los Angeles Times offers "Immigrant rights group files complaint against Santa Clarita councilman over 'proud racist' remark" (link):

The Full Rights for Immigrants Coalition has sent letters to state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley and the U.S. Department of Justice, alleging that Councilman Bob Kellar “breached the public’s trust and has acted in an unethical, racist, xenophobic and biased manner by making public comments scapegoating so-called illegal immigrants.”

The group also alleges that Kellar violated at least eight provisions of Santa Clarita’s ethics and conduct policy, which requires that municipal leaders be “independent, impartial and accountable to the people they serve.”

...“When a duly elected leader promotes divisive speech, that is essentially hate speech,” said Robert Gittelson, another coalition member.

1. The backstory is here; obviously, the "FRIC" is unable to figure things out or thinks they can find enough doublethinkers. Kellar wasn't promoting "divisive" or "hate" speech; he was trying to point out that enforcing our laws isn't racist.
2. Comprehensive immigration reform would give even more power to far-lefties like Gittleson and others who want to silence those who disagree with them. It's not in the U.S.'s best interests to give more power to people like him.
3. Kellar has apparently received wide support in Santa Clarita, as shown by attendance at a public meeting after his comments and the comments on the LAT's article.
4. Ann Simmons of the LAT fails (for a second time) to note that Robert Gittelson's wife is an immigration lawyer. It's not like he's trying to hide it; the first search result for his name is this, which includes this bio:

Robert Gittelson has been a garment manufacturer in the Los Angeles area for over twenty-five years. His wife, Patricia Gittelson, is an immigration attorney with offices in Van Nuys and Oxnard, California. Robert also works closely with Patricia on the administrative side of her immigration practice. Throughout his career, Mr. Gittelson has developed practical, first-hand experience in dealing with the immigration issues that are challenging our country today.

One would think that his having a financial stake in immigration matters would be a material fact that the LAT should mention.

Jon Henke: Sarah Palin's "death panels" are a "cartoon" (Peter Wallsten on GOP's quest for acceptance, respectability) - 09/14/09

Peter Wallsten of the Los Angeles Times - the reporter who refused to release the Obama/Khalidi tape (also here) - gleefully offers "Some fear GOP is being carried to the extreme/The Republican establishment hopes cooler heads will prevail over strongly anti-Obama parts of the conservative base" (link). In this case, Wallsten is what's called a "concern troll", and he's got some help.

Those weighing in on the side of pearl-clutching, intellectually-dishonest respectability include David Frum (former George W Bush speechwriter) and Michael Goldfarb (former spokesman for the McCain campaign).

Another is Jon Henke of TheNextRight (more about them later; for now see my comments here):

One WorldNetDaily article, which Henke called “hideously embarrassing” to conservatives, said that a Democratic proposal to create civilian emergency centers at military installations "appears designed to create the type of detention center that those concerned about use of the military in domestic affairs fear could be used as concentration camps for political dissidents, such as occurred in Nazi Germany."

Henke said, "There is a substantial discomfort among the people who want to make intellectual arguments and want to have a substantive role in the debate." He compared the Obama birth theorists to those who said Obama's healthcare overhaul would create "death panels."

" 'Death panels' is not a substantive contribution to the discussion. It's a cartoon," he said.

Farah mocked Henke and other critics in a column this month, saying they were doing liberals' bidding.

Indeed. And, in addition to alienating those who want the truth about the Obama citizenship issue - including a good portion of the readers of HotAir and Freerepublic - it's good to see Henke extending his outreach to supporters of Sarah Palin. While Obama healthcare doesn't include anything formally named "death panels", any time there are limited resources there will be some form of rationing, resulting in the same impact. See this from Michelle Malkin, and see also "Senate committee scraps healthcare provision that gave rise to 'death panel' claims/Though the claims are widely discredited, the Senate Finance Committee is withdrawing from its bill the inclusion of advance care planning consultations, calling them too confusing" from the LAT (link). Just as in this other case, a "fact" that was promulgated by the mainstream media and the Democrats turned out not to be a fact at all. The so-called "moderates" would have let the MSM and the Democrats get away with it; it took an apparent "fringe" person like Palin to bring it to light and force action. The "moderates" would have helped Obama and the Democrats; the "fringe" took them on. Now, that doesn't mean that everything the "fringe" says is accurate, but the smarter way to handle things is for those who are punctilious about the truth to explain what's true and what's not without attempting any purges. Needless to say, the "moderates" aren't smart enough to do that.

For some of those who agree with Frum, Goldfarb, and Henke, see this. Those Obama supporters who are also "concerned" that the GOP needs to rein in their extremists include Washington Monthly, Pandagon, The "Moderate" Voice, "The Mahablog", and Dave Weigel of the George Soros-funded Washington Independent. Henke, Frum, and Goldfarb are helping them and the LAT rather than taking them on.

Regarding the "emergency centers", here's the smart way to discuss that issue.

And, while Jerome Corsi and WorldNetDaily occasionally get their facts or conclusions wrong, they're in general an invaluable resource for Obama opponents and those who oppose things such as massive/illegal immigration and steps towards a North American Union. Without their attention to the latter, attempts to "harmonize" things between the three countries might be further along than they are now. And, note also that Corsi was one of the main targets of the Obama campaign; they went as far as silently editing one of his quotes in an attempt to make him look bad.

The choice for Republicans doesn't have to be between the wimpy elite RINOs and the True Conservative "fringe". Someone who holds truly moderate positions could help the GOP and could effectively oppose the Democrats. The issue is that the word "moderate" is defined by the MSM and the Democrats, and in the case of GOP leaders it generally includes someone who helps the MSM and the Democrats, as can be seen above.

UPDATE: In comments, someone says that Lyndon LaRouche was the first to come up with the "death panels" claim. If that person is her, get in touch for free deprogramming. If the person is another Larouche supporter, maybe you're right; I'm not going to bother looking into the timeline. If the person left that message in an attempt to portray Palin as "fringe" in the LaRouchian style, no sale. If LaRouche says the sky is blue, I'm not going to say it's green just because I feel some need to always disagree with everything he says or because I want others to see me disagreeing with him.

Also, it's worth recalling a couple of the other "moderate" positions offered by the MSM and their allies: pandering to the National Council of La Raza and supporting comprehensive immigration reform, aka amnesty. Neither are in any way moderate despite being sold as such by the MSM.

Irony deficient Christopher Knight of LAT: "Glenn Beck's '9-12' logo based on communist and socialist designs" - 09/14/09

Christopher Knight of the Los Angeles Times offers "Glenn Beck's '9-12' logo based on communist and socialist designs" (link), a hilarious example of someone - in this case some sort of art critic - just not getting the joke. His shocking news is that the logo used for 9/12's march on Washington was lifted from Communist symbols. That's obvious, and it was intentional. To help Knight understand this, he should refer to the classics.

See this discussion last month about how FreedomWorks controls the "grassroots" movement, specifically the logo:

In that FreedomWorks response, forwarded to the group a few days earlier by Jenny Beth and also obtained by TPMmuckraker, Brendan Steinhauser, an organizer for the corporate-backed group, explained that FreedomWorks would stick with its original logo, which shows raised fists in front of the Capitol building, in part because "the left (Keith Olbermann and Josh Marshall) thinks we don't understand the connotations of the symbol, which we do."

And, while Glenn Beck obviously has connections to the march, it's not his logo: as pointed out at the last link, it's a FreedomWorks invention.

Whatever you do, don't show Christopher Knight this site.

Sources for DHS rightwing extremism report: ADL, SPLC, NYT, LAT, Dave Weigel... - 08/12/09

* A large number of links to the Southern Poverty Law Center, including [1]. That SPLC link is misleading for the reasons outlined here and here. That misleading claim made it into DHS's report.

Creeping condominium: L.A. Mexican consulate working with governments, non-profits (Anna Gorman) - 07/23/09

The Mexican government has been able to gain a great deal of political power inside the U.S. over the years; see that link. If things continue as they are, eventually we may reach some form of de facto power-sharing arrangement where we don't have full control of parts of our territory or our populace. Corrupt, illegal activity-supporting libertarians, liberals, and conservatives would have you believe that's just a conspiracy theory ("reconquista"), but there are currently border areas and the like that are under shared control between other countries. And, there doesn't have to be an actual conspiracy, all things have to do is proceed as they are now.

With that in mind, Anna Gorman of the Los Angeles Times offers "Mexican Consulate in L.A. takes proactive role in guiding immigrants to social services" (link):

the Mexican Consulate in Los Angeles has become an almost de facto public agency in recent years, forming partnerships with government officials and nonprofits here to provide healthcare, offer mental health counseling, fight labor violations and hold literacy classes.

The consulate took another step earlier this year to meet the needs of Mexicans living in L.A. County by teaming up with the Superior Court and the county's Department of Children and Family Services to regularly assist Mexican nationals in dependency proceedings...

"The Mexican Consulate in L.A. has been kind of a lab," [Mexican consul general Juan Marcos Gutierrez-Gonzalez] said. "We're trying to expand and make more comprehensive the services we provide."

...Consular representatives met July 15 with union leaders and officials from Cal/OSHA and the Department of Labor to plan a labor rights week this fall to encourage people to report labor violations.

The previous week, the consulate signed an agreement with the Red Cross to work together to educate and prepare the Mexican immigrant community in case of a disaster or other emergency.

The next area the consulate plans to address is domestic violence. Consular officials are working to develop a network of law enforcement agencies and nonprofit organizations to provide services, such as counseling, legal representation and shelter, to Mexican victims of domestic violence.

Needless to say, Gorman didn't see fit to quote anyone who might not appreciate a foreign government worming their way into our country.

Thomas Saenz: new president of MALDEF (Villaraigosa, Obama's DOJ, support for illegal immigration) - 07/16/09

Thomas Saenz - current chief counsel to Los Angeles City mayor Antonio Villaraigosa - has been selected to be the new president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). He was under consideration to head the civil rights division of the Department of Justice until that was withdrawn due perhaps to him and his affiliations being a bit too on the extreme side.

Under his leadership, MALDEF will continue their strong support for illegal immigration. Per Phil Willon of the Los Angeles Times (link):

Among his priorities as head of the Latino civil rights organization, Saenz said, is ensuring that all children have equal access to a quality public education. The fund also will continue to combat anti-illegal immigrant sentiment that has been on the rise in some parts of the country. He said comprehensive immigration reform is a critical challenge for the Obama administration and Congress.

Willon also quotes their chairwoman Patricia Madrid:

"The Latino community is currently facing a drastic rise in hate crimes and witnessing an explosive rebirth of extremist anti-immigrant rhetoric and measures that adversely affect all Latinos..."

That "drastic rise" is only true if you try to mislead with statistics.

Tea Parties for July 4th: locations, live coverage for Independence Day - 07/03/09

I'll be offering some live coverage of the July 4th Independence Day tea parties in this post. In the meantime, if you're looking for specific locations where you can protest and wave your loopy signs, see teapartypatriots.org, surgeusa.org/actions/july4.htm, teapartyday.com, or reteaparty.com/teaparties.

But, before you go, please take a look at my extensive tea parties summary. At that page, I lay out all the reasons why those who aren't extreme fiscal conservatives might want to do something more effective instead.

UPDATE: Apparently the most professional "party" this time is the one in Dallas (dallasteaparty.org/2009/06/americasteaparty). It features headliners like Mickey Dolenz from the Monkees and Internet superstar Stephen Crowder. In keeping with their habit of playing dress-up, they've also got a Thomas Paine impersonator. On an ironic note, they've got Michael Cutler from the Center for Immigration Studies, despite the fact that many loony libertarians think there shouldn't be a border at all. Speaking of which, former Bob Barr running mate Wayne Allyn Root will be there, perhaps to try to sell the crowd used cars.

UPDATE 2: I enjoy parts of the last photo here, although I'm too much of a gentleman to try to figure out what sort of message they're trying to send.

UPDATE 3: These might be taken out of context, but here are two pictures from the big Dallas event showing very few people there:
twitpic.com/9bco5
twitpic.com/9bd34
They do have a horse there however.

UPDATE 4: As could be expected, Glenn Reynolds links to some of the events (link). There are more here - including someone apparently promoting Alex Jones' Infowars - and here. Explaining to the loons what's wrong with some of those signs is left as an exercise.

UPDATE 5: Sign from the Austin, Texas party: "Change is what Germany wanted in 1932" (link).

I'm going to start using the tagline "Home of the smart and effective opposition to Obama and the Democrats."

UPDATE 6: First, I misspelled his name "Wayne Allen Root", now corrected.

And, even if I'd known that SNL alumna Victoria Jackson was going to be at the La Canada version I wouldn't have gone. However, Los Angeles Times columnist Chris Erskine did (link). It's not a complete hit piece, but he's obviously not sympathetic to their concerns (nor much am I):

In such a climate, it strikes me as . . . well, almost un-American to be griping so vehemently about helping those less fortunate. Were this a war, we'd all dig a little deeper to buy guns and battleships.

If those at the parties weren't completely selfish, had an interest in their fellow citizens, and had an intellectual basis for their whining, he might not have written that or at least they'd have an answer to it. As it is, he's mostly right even if his implicit solution isn't mostly right.

Also, the Dallas party was projected to get up to 50,000 attendees. Even one of their supporters is forced to say, "[m]any reported upwards of 15,000 in attendance" (link). And, that was apparently the main event.

And, at the Dallas event, John Cornyn was booed; that's the best the partiers can do because actually engaging him in debate and showing all the ways he's wrong is beyond them.

An MSM report summarizing attendance at all the parties isn't available, and Pajamas Media is strangely silent on that issue. I'll be very, very generous and estimate that the attendance for all events combined was 150,000. That represents 0.05% of the U.S. population, and that's a very high estimate.

UPDATE 7: Instapundit scours Google News for MSM reports; apparently the hundreds of PJTV "citizen journalists" failed him (pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/81371). In addition to towns I've never heard of, one report he links to is "Genesee TEA Party holds Independence Day tax protest, plans campaign against Hurley millage" (link). "Millage" means property tax, and Hurley refers to a hospital run by the city of Flint. These people are practically carrying the local Democrat over the goal line:

The 0.9-mill countywide millage for Hurley would generate $10 million per year for the next 10 years. The owner of a $100,000 home would pay an extra $45 per year in property taxes if it passes.

Patrick Wardell, CEO and president of Hurley, said the city-owned hospital serves 69 percent of the county's uninsured and underinsured. He added that the services the hospital offers, such as a children's hospital and burn unit, are not money-makers but act as a safety net county-wide.

"Because of the nature of the mission of a place like Hurley, serving the whole county, cost-cutting is simply not enough," he said.

At the TEA Party, some county residents disagreed. Mark Berberich of Flint said Hurley should have to run like a business, and some businesses end up failing if they're not bringing in enough funds.

"I don't want anyone to fail, but some will fail," he said.

If Hurley is mismanaged, they should investigate using public records and then suggest ways to improve their operations. That's not what they're doing.

Kamala Harris program "trained illegal immigrants for jobs they couldn't legally hold" - 06/22/09

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris is a contender for California state Attorney General. She's bad enough that some liberals in her city think she's incompetent and soft on crime.

300,000 new, taxation-friendly citizens in California, thanks to the GOP helping the Dems import new voters - 05/11/09

Teresa Watanabe of the Los Angeles Times offers "Naturalized citizens are poised to reshape California's political landscape" (link):

More than 1 million immigrants became U.S. citizens last year, the largest surge in history, hastening the ethnic transformation of California's political landscape with more Latinos and Asians now eligible to vote... Leading the wave, California's 300,000 new citizens accounted for nearly one-third of the nation's total and represented a near-doubling over 2006... The new citizens are reshaping California's electorate and are likely to reorder the state's policy priorities, some political analysts predict. Several polls show that Latinos and Asians are more supportive than whites of public investments and broad services, even if they require higher taxes...

If you're a fiscal conservative and taxation is your issue, perhaps allowing the Democrats to import hundreds of thousands of new Democratic voters isn't such a good idea. Needless to say, the leaders of the GOP can't figure that out or are too corrupt to care. On the state level, that translates into Allan Hoffenblum offering a quote similar to those he's offered for countless other LAT articles over the years:

"The reason the Republican Party is in such dire straits is its inability to successfully reach out and change its image among Latinos and Asians... The image is too shrill on immigration. It's an image of an intolerant cult."

"Changing its image" consists of doing the same thing the GOP leadership has in fact been doing: allowing the Dems to import new voters. Maybe the rest of the GOP shouldn't listen to those who got them into this situation in the first place.

Obama immigration budget: does a McCain: border security, then amnesty; fulfills promise to Mexican government; worried about *southbound* flows - 05/06/09

Remember how when John McCain used the cheap, misleading tactic of talking about how he wanted to "secure the border first" and then use that to push for amnesty, and Obama supporters lied and said he didn't support comprehensive immigration reform anymore? Well, now Barack Obama wants to secure the border first and then use that to push for amnesty. Somehow it's different this time.

From "Obama budget puts security first at the border/He'll ask Congress to help curb the flow of arms to Mexico before seeking any immigration reform" (by Anna Gorman and Peter Nicholas of the Los Angeles Times; link):

President Obama will ask Congress for $27 billion for border and transportation security in the next budget year, fulfilling a promise to the Mexican government to battle the southbound flow of illegal weapons and setting the stage for immigration reform by first addressing enforcement, administration officials said Tuesday.

While some of what he proposes might do something about the northbound flow, and there's no statement from Obama being as upfront as the LAT is, that's a good reminder of who and what are really important to the elites.

Rather than emphasizing fence construction, the budget concentrates on fighting drug smuggling, increasing funding for the Transportation Security Administration as well as:

...[doubling DHS] funding to nearly $47 million to combat southbound firearms and currency smuggling, and adds more than 100 Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection officers... Among the immigration enforcement priorities, the budget increases funding by 30% to nearly $200 million to enable the Department of Homeland Security to hire 80 new people to identify criminal immigrants in the jails and prisons for deportation... Obama also wants to spend $112 million, a 12% increase, to make E-Verify, an employment verification program, more reliable and to get more employers to use it.

The rest of the article consists of Gorman and Nicholas blueskying for the administration:

In devoting more money to security and enforcement, Obama may be creating some political space needed to revamp the immigration system. The president risks alienating many conservatives if he doesn't emphasize strong border and immigration enforcement before taking action on a reform package that would create a path to legalization for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants... "If the American people don't feel like you can secure the borders," Obama said during a prime-time news conference last week, "then it's hard to strike a deal that would get people out of the shadows and on a pathway to citizenship who are already here, because the attitude of the average American is going to be, 'Well, you're just going to have hundreds of thousands of more coming in each year.' " ...The emphasis on border security isn't a surprising first step by the administration, said Angela Kelley, vice president for immigration policy at the Center for American Progress, a Washington-based think tank. ..."It's a no-brainer that he is going to want to spend a lot of resources and build muscle at the border," she said... [But, the] second chapter better be looking to Congress and being in the driver's seat, both publicly and behind closed doors, driving a legislative package successfully."

Alejandro Mayorkas lobbied for commutation for drug dealer (Clinton) - 05/01/09

Josh Meyer of the Los Angeles Times looks into the background of Alejandro Mayorkas - recently nominated to head the U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) - here. For an unknown reason, they aren't trying to completely sugarcoat his past, subheding the article "The former U.S. attorney played a role in a 2001 decision by President Clinton to commute a drug dealer's prison sentence":

Mayorkas also was one of several prominent Southern California political figures who played a role in a 2001 decision by President Clinton to commute a drug dealer's prison sentence... Mayorkas later admitted phoning the White House counsel's office at the urging of the elder Vignali... A subsequent congressional investigation criticized Mayorkas, saying it was improper for a senior law enforcement official to be lobbying for such a commutation, especially for someone convicted in another district.

In his defense, he says he didn't do his due diligence. And, if that's not enough, "I made a mistake". Someone from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics is quoted as asking for a better explanation.

Rosa Brooks to Pentagon; CFR, Soros; her Darwinistic, anti-American immigration policy; journalism bailout - 04/09/09

Former Los Angeles Times columnist Rosa Brooks is going through the revolving door again, this time to be an advisor at the Defense Department, specifically to Michele Flournoy the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. There's a lot about her not to like; here's just some of it:

1. She was affiliated with George Soros' Open Society Institute and the Council on Foreign Relations.

2. During the Clinton years, she advised Harold Koh in his previous position at the State Department.

3. In her farewell (for now) column, she advocates for a "government bailout of journalism" (link). In addition to various subsidies, she wants to "[use] tax dollars and [grant] licenses in ways that encourage robust and independent reporting and commentary". Anyone who's older than five knows just how narrowly she'd define "robust". For instance, Lou Dobbs probably wouldn't make the cut, not to mention many others.

4. In June 2007, she offered "How immigrants improve the curve" (link). Discussing all the things wrong with it would take too long, but the first thing wrong is her contention that Americans are fat and lazy and that the only solution is giving us (them from her perspective) the competition of bringing in immigrants, whether legal or not.

The second thing wrong with that column is much more troubling and hopefully she'll be called on it one of these days:

And when it comes to illegal immigrants, just getting here takes astounding courage. Illegal immigrants endure astonishing privation and risk - just for the chance to improve their lot by doing the backbreaking work so few native-born Americans have the inclination to do.

It's rare to find anyone promoting the benefits of illegally journeying to the U.S., which frequently involves crossing a dry and either very hot or very cold desert. What Brooks' statement equates to is a Darwinistic immigration policy, where our southern border serves as a way to filter out those not fit enough to come to the U.S.: they die along the way. According to Rosa Brooks, they wouldn't have made good Americans anyway.

Please go to one of her public appearances or similar and point that out to her on video, then upload her response to video sharing sites.

Johanna Neuman /LAT "speechless" about Asian name normalization to avoid confusion - 04/09/09

Johanna Neuman of the Los Angeles Times offers "As Obama tackles immigration, Texas legislator suggests immigrants Americanize names" (link).

DOJ nominee Thomas Perez pushed driver's licenses for illegal aliens when president of CASA - 04/06/09

Paul West of the Los Angeles Times offers "Obama's civil rights nominee should be ready for a fight" (link) about Thomas Perez, the Maryland labor secretary who was nominated to head the civil rights division of the Department of Justice. Among other things, it contains this:

Immigration is a minor responsibility for the division's lawyers, but the topic is likely to be a focus in the confirmation of Perez, a Dominican American. For seven years, he was a director of CASA of Maryland, an immigrant rights group, and served as its president in 2002. That year, CASA lobbied the Maryland General Assembly against a proposal by Democratic Gov. Parris N. Glendening to make it tougher for immigrants to get driver's licenses.

Alan Clayton, a Perez supporter, said the nominee's association with CASA would make it harder for him to win Senate confirmation, describing the Maryland nonprofit as "very, very hard-core" on immigrant rights issues.

From the American perspective, CASA de Maryland is indeed very "hardcore": they're very strong supporters of illegal activity and they're currently being funded by Citgo, i.e., the government of Venezuela. Contrary to how Paul West describes them, they aren't an "immigrant rights group", they're a far-left group that supports illegal immigration every way they can. Even the Washington Post has recently noted how insecure Maryland driver's licenses are.

Census worker sign: "Yes we can! 2010 census." (highly politicized Los Angeles office) - 04/06/09

Ari Bloomekatz of the Los Angeles Times offers this blurb:

"The census is here!" shouted Esther Cepeda, manager of the local census office downtown. Music played and employees carried signs that read: "The census, coming to your neighborhood" and "Yes we can! 2010 census."

"Yes we can" was, of course, one of Barack Obama's campaign slogans, and he took it from the slogan "si se puede"; if there are Spanish-language versions of those signs it would almost certainly be translated into that phrase. While it's had other uses, that slogan was more recently used in support of illegal immigration at various marches. Is the Census Bureau supporting Obama's goals, or illegal immigration, or both? I suspect both, with L.A. City Councilman Jose Huizar telling the census workers:

"The groups who are most under-counted are the people who need our help the most,” he said, specifically referring to people who are homeless or immigrants or people of color. During the last census, Los Angeles missed out on about $200 million in funding because of under-counting, he said.

"Do we want that to happen again?" Huizar asked the crowd.

"No!" they responded.

Huizar also announced that census data collected by workers would be kept confidential and would not be given to immigration or police officials.

Soros-funded Democratic immigration push might ditch business interests - 03/28/09

According to Peter Wallsten of the Los Angeles Times, unspecified immigration groups will be making a push for comprehensive immigration reform this fall that would see the Democrats try to get it on their own without bringing business interests into their big, crooked tent: link (See also last month's "Hilda Solis to prefer labor enforcement to immigration enforcement?")

Under their scheme, there'd be a massive amnesty, following by:

an independent commission that would assess labor and industry data to decide how many foreign workers should be allowed into the country. The system, designed by Ray Marshall, a Labor secretary under President Carter, would replace a maze of special temporary worker visas that are granted each year to high-tech specialists, agriculture workers and other foreigners brought into the U.S. by foreign and domestic firms.

That would probably alienate business groups like the US Chamber of Commerce, but the thinking is that it would bring the AFL CIO on board.

And:

To bolster their cause, advocates are planning an $18-million media and grass-roots campaign for the fall. The funding is coming primarily from liberal foundations, including one founded by billionaire activist George Soros.

Since there are several of those it's difficult to know which it could be.

"Bank on Los Angeles": city helps corrupt banks profit from illegal activity - 03/25/09

The City of Los Angeles recently announced a new public-private partnership called "Bank on Los Angeles" (bankonla.com) that's designed to help 10,000 low-income residents who don't have bank accounts ("the unbanked") open up accounts. It's also open to illegal aliens [1], and that means that Los Angeles City will be encouraging corruption by helping major banks profit from money that was earned illegally.

Patt Morrison's greatest journalistic accomplishment: getting a thrift shop to change their name (Sarah Palin) - 02/14/09

During the campaign, Sarah Palin said that her favorite place to shop was a thrift store in Anchorage called ''Out of the Closet". I happen to know that there's also a chain of gay-benefiting shops in Los Angeles by the same name. If I had initiated the process whereby that chain considered filing a trademark infringement case against the Alaska store and that store had then changed their name to "Second Run", the last thing I'd do is crow about it. In fact, I'd try to prevent anyone from finding out that I was so petty, so incredibly low-class, so lower than a snake's belly, so small-minded.

Patt Morrison of the Los Angeles Times has no such compunctions (huffingtonpost.com/patt-morrison/sarah-palin-finally-gets_b_166966.html):

I am proud to say that in my blog here and at the Los Angeles Times, I busted the Alaska shop's chops, right after Palin said it was her favorite boutique. The next day, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, citing Palin's remarks and my post, announced that it was looking into trademark infringement by the Anchorage store... With a name like ["Second Run"], it can still be Sarah Palin's favorite store. She can buy her 2012 campaign wardrobe there. With her own money.

This is truly Pat Morrisson's greatest, single journalistic achievement and a shining example of the MSM's keen interest in real reporting.

Jamie Gold can't see problem with recent Los Angeles Times pro-illegal immigration propaganda - 02/08/09

[UPDATE: Jamie Gold's idiotic reply below]

Earlier this month, Jason Song of the Los Angeles Times offered a pro-illegal immigration propaganda piece called "For an illegal immigrant, getting into UCLA was the easy part". It generated a few hundred emails from their readers, and now Jamie Gold - that paper's feckless "Readers Representative" - offers an round-up of reaction where she can't find anything wrong (link). Summary: she seems to be taking disingenuous lessons from Clark Hoyt of the New York Times. Note also this:

"It's not either/or," responds California Editor David Lauter. "The thinking on why we did the story is pretty straightforward: illegal immigration is a major issue of public concern in California. One aspect of that issue, which has been very hotly debated, is whether students who are undocumented should be allowed in California's public colleges and universities. That issue has been debated in the Legislature and is currently the subject of a court case challenging California's tuition policies."

I left the following (HTMLified) comment:

Jason Song/LAT promotes illegal alien taking UCLA education from a U.S. citizen - 02/03/09

Jason Song of the Los Angeles Times offers "For an illegal immigrant, getting into UCLA was the easy part" (link), a PIIPP-like story of a woefully unprepared illegal alien's trials and tribulations raising money to attend that school.

George Skelton: illegal aliens are a drain on California, so let's legalize them - 02/02/09

George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times offers "Illegal immigrants are a factor in California's budget math" (link). On the one hand, it takes a tremendous amount of courage to get some truth into the LAT's pages, in this case his number-crunching which concludes that "the state spends well over $5 billion a year on illegal immigrants and their families." That includes California-specific programs which were pushed through by the might-as-well-be Mexican agents in the legislature.

On a hopeful note, he says this near the end:

My view is this: These people are here illegally and shouldn't be, regardless of whether they're just looking for a better life. Do it the legal way. And enforce the law against hiring the undocumented.

Then, rushing to cover his PC posterior, this is the penult:

The Obama administration and Congress need to finally pass an immigration reform act that allows for an agriculture work program and a route to citizenship.

That "reform" would do little more than give them a status change, from "illegal alien" one day to "legalized resident" the next. And, eventually, all those millions who were legalized would push for yet another amnesty and would use their increased political power to fight against enforcement, making the situation even worse.

Luis Gutierrez: Obama told me to tell you he supports immigration "reform"; amnesty supporters heartened - 12/19/08

Teresa Watanabe of the Los Angeles Times offers "Immigration-overhaul supporters hope their hour has come/With Obama in office, a sympathetic Cabinet and more Democrats in Congress, supporters hope to revive a reform package next year. But the economic downturn sparks worry about protecting U.S. workers" (link). She quotes various "immigrant advocates" who think that the Obama win will mean that comprehensive immigration reform is more likely. In fact:

In a national teleconference Thursday, Rep. (Luis Gutierrez) (D-Ill.), said Obama had asked him to relay that he remains committed to a comprehensive solution to repair the nation's immigration system (aka amnesty). Advocates said Obama's Cabinet appointments were a promising sign that he was assembling a strong team to deliver on reform promises, including New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson as secretary of Commerce, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as secretary of Homeland Security and, announced Thursday, Rep. (Hilda Solis) (D-El Monte) as secretary of Labor... In the Chicago area, Gutierrez said, Roman Catholic and evangelical churches have begun mobilizing thousands of citizens to support immigration reform by publicizing the hardship they face waiting for loved ones to receive entry visas...

Jesse Washington/AP's supposed "outbreak of racial anger" after Obama win - 11/16/08

Jesse Washington of the Associate Press provides another example of Obama supporters continuing to play the race card after the election and by so doing shows that Obama's method of winning hasn't actually done much about race relations. The article is an example of the MSM and friends basically just keeping one race in line as was done in the past with another race (link).

Crosses burning. Children chanting, "Assassinate Obama." Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars.

Yes, there definitely has been an outbreak of isolated incidents involving those who have no real power. Washington can only find one physical attack, but there's definitely been a distinct trend of a very small number of completely isolated incidents. Like this incident he mentions:

Four North Carolina State University students admitted writing anti-Obama comments in a tunnel designated for free expression.

According to this, what they wrote could be "borderline threats". But, don't worry. From the same link: The university painted over all the tunnel's messages Wednesday because officials felt the disparaging comments were "going over the edge of what was acceptable," [a university police officer] said.

We're also informed that there was a "glow of racial progress and harmony that bloomed after the election of Democrat Barack Obama". Oddly, I don't recall much of a glow after his surrogates - now including Washington - constantly tried to portray Obama's opponents as racists. In fact, I don't think anyone who doesn't work for or serve as a surrogate for Obama (including the MSM) could locate such a glow. In other words, Washington just invented it.

From California to Maine, police have documented a range of incidents, including vandalism, threats and at least one physical attack. There have been "hundreds" of incidents since the election, many more than usual, said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes.

Washington later points out that Potok is white, which isn't really material. What is material is that Potok and friends are far-left grievance mongers who in effect make their money from hate: without "hate" - whether real, mischaracterized, or just hyped - the SPLC wouldn't be in business. Potok also isn't honest when it comes to statistics.

UPDATE: A trend has been spotted! This time, it's of left-wing hack reporters continuing to play the race card after the election. The second instance of the trend is "After Obama's win, white backlash festers in US" by Patrik Jonsson of The Christian Science Monitor (link). It's basically the same article as Washington's, right down to relying on Potok of the SPLC.

11/23/08 UPDATE 2: The trend continues, as Howard Witt of the Los Angeles Times offers the same article as those above: "White extremists lash out over election of first black president", link. It also quotes Potok, and it would be interesting to know whether Potok reached out to those "reporters" or whether they reached out to him.

11/23/08 UPDATE 3: You have to give it to Potok, he's able to get a story out there, but of course it's one that the MSM desperately wants to tell. Others offering the same story as those above are Hannah Strange of the Times UK
(link), Pablo Guzman of WCBS-TV (link), Robert Lorei of WMNF-FM (link), and Jim Avila on tonight's ABC News.

Pages