In the past, on a few of the occasions when the PBS NewsHour has covered immigration matters they've invited on those who were legitimately on different sides of the issue. In the past several months, however, their idea of "debate" has switched to featuring people who are on the same side. For instance, David Brooks and Mark Shields arguing over which form of a massive amnesty they prefer.

The latest example of PBS NewsHour degrading into a propaganda source is illustrated by a "likely voters" panel they conducted. Most such panels should perhaps consist of average voters, rather than wonks. However, PBS seems to have snuck a "plant" onto the panel, in the person of Eduardo Romero of the Nonprofit Roundtable (nonprofitroundtable.org), who had this to say:

EDUARDO ROMERO: ... really quickly, as well. I think we heard this is an economic challenge, but it's also a moral challenge. And I think we've heard some -- you asked about amnesty. I remember when amnesty was not a dirty word.

GWEN IFILL: Yes, when did that happen?

EDUARDO ROMERO: But somehow, it's switched, and "illegal" for me is a dirty word. One can say one breaks the laws, but tell that to that pre-school kid who now is determined to be an illegal alien...

He goes on to play the race card and various other pro-illegal immigration talking points. Not only was no one around to respond to his inflammatory comments, but another panelist - a Republican - supported amnesty. If they're going to have someone like him on the panel, they should also have invited someone who could have shown just how he's wrong.

PBS NewsHour has truly degenerated into Washington Post-level hackery.

Please send them a polite message via this form informing them that debates usually involve at least two sides.