Molly Hennessy-Fiske/LAT promotes corruption in Arkansas; Huckabee

Molly Hennessy-Fiske of the Los Angeles Times offers a fine slice of pro-illegal immigration propaganda called "Arkansas Immigration Raid Reaches Beyond Workers" (link). It "reports" on the aftermath of the raid at the Petit Jean Poultry plant in Arkadelphia, Arkansas a year ago. We're informed that "[i]nstead of feeling reassured that immigration laws were being enforced, many felt that their community had been disrupted":

The Petit Jean workers had come to be more than low-wage poultry processors. They were church friends, classmates and teammates in the local softball league. And so some residents responded to the raid by helping workers fight deportation, driving them to court and writing to lawmakers for help. Others donated money, food and clothing to the families of workers detained or sent back to Mexico.

While there may have indeed been "many" who donated money, the only ones named in the article are:

- Mike Huckabee (governor of Arkansas)
- Blanche Lincoln (Democratic Senator)
- "prominent Arkadelphia citizens"
- Troy Tucker ("the county sheriff at the time of the raid")
- Henry Morgan (county prosecutor)
- Dr. Wesley Kluck ("a pediatrician, and his wife, Debbie"; he's a member of the Ark. Chamber of Commerce. The LAT also mentions that he's a school chum of Huck and wrote to him about the raids.)
- a 23-year-old community college student (who helped an illegal alien pay a smuggler)
- Pentecostal Pastor Bill O'Connell
- Jon Capps (a landlord who says of the illegal aliens: "I want them here... They're good renters.")

The college student is probably just a useful idiot, but as for the rest one wonders whether something else is going on. Could they be profiting directly or indirectly from illegal immigration? Should the Los Angeles Times' Molly Hennessy-Fiske have asked? Could the members of the local elite be supporting one another? Are transcribing sob stories the best reporting job that the LAT can muster?

As for Huckabee, he was apparently asked a question by the LAT:

"Our first priority should be to secure our borders," Huckabee said in an e-mail to The Times. "I'm less threatened by people who cross the line to make beds, pick tomatoes or pluck chickens" than by potential terrorists crossing the border.

This is similar to things that "Huck" has said before, and the follow-up questions remain the same. Clearly, the LAT should have asked him whether he also supports the corruption associated with illegal immigration and the highly negative impact it has on our political system. (One of the three people the LAT finds opposed to illegal immigration is right where Huck is wrong: "We are a nation of laws, and you cannot ignore those basic laws.")

If the LAT wants to try some real reporting, here's a whole site dedicated to Huckabee's various scandals. I was unable to find a list of contributions he's received, but surely the Los Angeles Times could look into that. Maybe they could talk to this guy; maybe they could look into the connections between Huckabee, Tyson Foods, and LULAC. If someone continually excuses illegal activity and corruption, real newspapers should look into whether that person is corrupt.

In light of the LAT story about the landscaper who was also an immigration activist (the latter not disclosed), one wonders exactly what the Los Angeles Times is ignoring in order to promote their agenda.

When the LAT editorializes in support of changing our immigration laws (, can we trust that they would support enforcement of the new laws? If someone's bottom line is affected, wouldn't they simply publish propaganda pieces like this? Is assuming that the LAT is in any way not simply a propaganda source giving them too much credit?

Write readers.rep *at* with your thoughts.

ADDENDUM: While the LAT's problem is much bigger than MHF, note that she started a blog in early 2004 at

My name is Molly Hennessy-Fiske. I am an American reporter. On February 21, I travel to Mexico for six weeks with the Pew Fellowship program. I want to speak with people and write about immigration to the United States. I write for a number of publications, including The News & Observer newspaper in North Carolina.

At the page, she refers to the comments attached to a story she wrote ( as "some disturbing reader responses". While certainly rough-edged, the comments she refers to would only be disturbing to someone who supports illegal immigration.

UPDATE: On a trivial note, the (apparently unaffiliated) "Mike Huckabee For President 2008" blog did not approve the comment I left there informing it that I too had written about Huck's article ("MSM: Huckabee Right on Illegal Immigration"). I guess the news that its idol is completely corrupt was too much for it to bear simply approving my comment.


I just now found your blog. In your article you wrote: "The college student is probably just a useful idiot, but as for the rest one wonders whether something else is going on."

While I cannot speak to the immigration issue and though I live in another state, I have had the opportunity to meet this young lady and she is anything but an "idiot." She is a charming, intelligent student who has worked hard to improve herself and the situation of her family. Your shallow and flippant journalism was a cheap shot, and slanderous toward the young lady. You ought to be ashamed!

Just a note to say "good article" in 10/2 front page of the LA Times regarding public anger over public pension plans. Hopefully some of the Kern County Board of Supervisors read it, as they recently passed a "fat cat" retirement benefit package for county employees (90% of salary for some not even in hazardous duty positions)along with less of a contribution, according to the Bakersfield Californian. Such a deal. Good to be rich, eh!!

John S. Bolton is dead on the money and that is what its all about selling you on the open market

Huckabee also did not get challenged on his suppressed major premise that illegals who come here to 'pick tomatoes' are, in their aggregate not a threat.
It is the pure worker premise, that workers, or at least the most menial, do not increase the aggression on the net taxpayer, when they immigrate.
This is not like sugar subsidies where nobody but the planters much cares about their being given out. People care greatly about immigration, the future population of the country, its quality and whether such additions are hostile or not.
Terrorism is not the only hostile act that foreigners here can impose by their aggression.