In an interview with KCBS radio that probably had little journalistic content whatsoever, Democratic Congressperson Zoe Lofgren of San Jose expressed the hope that immigration "reform" could be passed. She'll be the new head of the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, and she was also mentioned as an upcoming player in the NYT article linked to by "McCain, Kennedy, Gutierrez, Flake collaborating on immigration "reform", Part 2".

To help both her and KCBS, let's examine their recap and - hopefully - the reader will go a bit further and contact either Lofgren or the station and suggest ways that they could lie better (in the first case) or ask better questions (in the second case). You can reach KCBS at 415-474-KCBS (5227), and Lofgren is at 202-225-3072 or 408-271-8700.

The representative points out that many of the politicians who pinned their re-election hopes on being tough on immigration lost in the midterm elections. "So I think that has been a wake up call for the Republicans that people want some practical solutions," she added.

At that point in the interview, the "reporter" should have called her on her BS by refering her to the many sources that have shown that canard to be false.

She said an amnesty program is under consideration but there still must be some consequences for those who have blatantly violated the law.

At that point in time, the "reporter" should have first thanked her for at least being honest enough to call it an amnesty. Then, the "reporter" should have discussed those "consequences" that illegal aliens will be subjected to before receiving their amnesty, such as not having to pay two out of five years of taxes. And, the "reporter" should have asked her exactly how she intends to prevent the amnesty being seen as a massive "Welcome" sign for future illegal aliens. If she says through enforcement, then the "reporter" should have pointed out that the 1986 amnesty was never really enforced, as well as noting all the forces currently working against enforcement and asked Lofgren whether she fantastically assumes they'll stop opposing enforcement after they get the "reform" they seek.

Lofgren said the goal is to get some true legislative reform next year in order to avoid the congestion of the presidential elections in 2008.

At that point in time, the "reporter" should have (once again) called her on her BS, asking her to deny that she realizes that "reform" is a political loser and could harm Democratic - and Republican - contenders for president.

Since the reporter clearly didn't ask any of those questions, they could have just saved time and money by asking Lofgren to send in an audio press release.