Adam Nagourney doesn't confront GOP candidates on immigration politics

Adam Nagourney of the New York Times (with assistance from Rachel Swarns) offers "G.O.P. Candidates Confront Immigration Politics". Despite being two screens long, we're only told that GOP candidates are facing the ire of Iowa voters regarding immigration matters, but we aren't given much in the way of specifics. And, Nagourney doesn't attempt to ask Senator John McCain or others any tough questions that would reveal the flaws in their positions. About the only slight news in the piece is that McCain is backing away from Kennedy-McCain, and instead is moving towards a scheme similar to that proposed by Mike Pence. You know, the one that featured unlimited immigration.

We're also informed that "McCain... is from a border state that is deeply divided over immigration." Yes, large majorities voting for three propositions designed to reduce illegal immigration mark a state as "deeply divided". It's truly an "NYT-style" deep divide.

And: "Tom Tancredo... has based his campaign on an anti-immigration message". Didn't Adam Nagourney just lie?


Mr. Giuliani has yet to campaign in Iowa and has not been pressed on his views on immigration;

Why not? Isn't it the job of people like Nagourney or Swarns or others at the NYT and other media sources to press them on vital issues? Why aren't they doing their jobs?

Then - oddly enough - Nagourney quotes someone saying something a bit questionable:

Mr. Brownback was reminded of that throughout the day on Saturday, including during his march in the St. Patrick's Day Parade up Locust Avenue in Des Moines. "We need to build a fence," Mike Clark, 38, a pig farmer, told Mr. Brownback as he walked alongside him. "We need to get them stopped."

Then, we get thoughts on the Pence scheme:

"The business community has always been skeptical about any requirement to make workers leave the U.S. to obtain legal status," said Laura Reiff, of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, which represents service industries. "We haven't ruled a Pence-like touchback completely out of the question, but it would need to be an efficient, functional process."

The EWIC is a bit more than that, including among their members the American Immigration Lawyers Association, First Data (former owners of Western Union), Tyson Foods, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Please write public *at* with your thoughts. You can also contact the "reporter" by clicking on his name at the article page and then clicking the contact link.


_Didn't Adam Nagourney just lie?_ Hopefully not, at least not entirely. Because the level of legal immigration is also a concern, or should be. One reason to oppose amnesty (aka 'reform') is that it would greatly increase the level of legal immigration. But yes, Tancredo's main thing is illegal immigration; this piece is just another example of how unprofessional some writers are regarding this.

Tancredo's opposition is to ILLEGAL immigration which the word ILLEGAL as usual is left out of the Times story....the media playing the same old game..............

Although LEGAL and HB1 visa's are a big problem as well....more cheap labor for big greedy businesses

Nagourney is an ink-stained wretch who hews the party line assiduously. I only hope that the good citizens of Iowa keep inundating their Repub candidates with their concerns about being overrun in every small town in the state. Local govts can't afford to police, educate, and hospitalize an illiterate band of drifters who fetch up at their door.

I meant to say "grifters," not drifters!