Rightwing's muted response to Brown signing unpopular, anti-American immigration law

If California governor Jerry Brown signed a bill that dared raise taxes on multi-billionaires by even a few pennies, you can bet that rightwing internet activists would be up in arms about it. Yet, the reaction of those same groups to yesterday's signing by Brown of an anti-American bill that lets illegal aliens deprive some citizens of college is a bit more muted.

In fact, there's very of it, as will be detailed below. If you're a conservative and you oppose illegal immigration, then you aren't exactly being served by those who'd ignore such a blatant attempt to benefit illegal aliens at the expense of American citizens. Not to mention how politically useful this issue would be for rightwingers: giving illegal aliens in-state tuition isn't very popular and it can be used to discredit many Democratic Party leaders.

Part of the reason they aren't up in arms about this is probably because it doesn't affect them (or those who pull their strings). Part of the reason might be because they can't figure out how to deal with this issue correctly (for that, see the DREAM Act page). And, part is no doubt due to the skewed sense of patriotism shown by some conservatives who show their patriotism by turning their backs on California.

First, as of post time, there are only two major rightwing blogs [1] discussing this story. Townhall has a Reuters article about this linked from their front page with dozens of comments, and the completely inaccurately-named American Thinker has a post about this linked from their front page too.

The latter is by Rick Moran and misleadingly says the bill is for "the children of illegal immigrants" (that link applies to the California law too). In the two short original sentences in Moran's post, there's no editorializing or calls to action. It includes a comment (by "Gunny G") showing the skewed sense of patriotism that some conservatives have:

WHO CARES what Mexifornia does? Let the lib nuts stew in their own juices, that is what the 10th Amendment is all about. Just don't ask the other 56 states to bail you out. Obama has tapped us out.

On Twitter, a search for dream teaparty shows about 50 results over the past day, including a few from me. A search for dreamact teaparty has just five results, including one from me. For comparison purposes, there are usually about 20 tweets per every one to three minutes that include teaparty somewhere in the tweet, and most of those are from those affiliated with the tea parties movement and not their opponents. Replacing teaparty with tcot ("top conservatives on twitter") in the first search has about 140 results over the past day. There about 300 tweets with dreamact over the past 17 hours; due to their technical issues Twitter won't go back further at least on the mobile search. Note that most of the tweets about this (pro or con) would have been yesterday.

Now for those who aren't even trying to do the jobs they've assigned themselves. The following sites have nothing about the bill signing that I can find:

* Glenn Reynolds' Instapundit
* Redstate (checked: front page, recommended diaries, and California sections and Moe Lane's diary)
* Daily Caller (checked: front page, US, and Politics sections)
* Pajamas Media (checked: front page)
* HotAir
* Patterico
* Just One Minute
* Andrew Breitbart's Big Government, Big Journalism (which doesn't even have an immigration category!), breitbart.tv or breitbart.com (checked: front pages)
* Powerline
* Dan Riehl's site (note: he did tweet the news about the signing however)
* Human Events (checked: front page)
* Gateway Pundit
* Ace Mu Nu

If that changes I'll provide an update. If you want it to change and you want conservative activists to cover important issues, let them know what you think.

UPDATE: I corrected a typo: "at the expense of American citizens" was "at the expense of foreign citizens".

And, about 30 hours after posting this, just two sites in the last list above have mentioned California's new law: HotAir (which only placed it in their headlines section) and Pajamas Media.

HotAir created a full post (not just a headline link) by Ed Morrissey called "California Banning: Unloaded guns and teenage tanning sessions", writing several dozens of words about the other bills Brown signed or vetoed, but not even mentioning the immigration bill.

Pajamas Media has one paragraph about the new law in this post, which I'm linking because you might want to see how childish and generally stupid the graphic is and how little the one paragraph they wrote about the new law will do to stop it being implemented.

Meanwhile, Gateway Pundit, like HotAir, mentions Brown's actions but not anything about the immigration bill ("California Bans Tanning Bed Use By Minors… But Abortions Are OK"). Note, of course, that Jerry Brown and California are not synonyms.

And, Breitbart's sites go Gateway Pundit one better. They have two full posts about Brown's actions but none that I can find about the immigration law: "CA Governor Brown Signs Open Carry Ban" and "Paging Occupy Wall Streeters: Brown Doles Out Corporate Welfate to Hollywood".

UPDATE 2: In the three days since this was first posted, Glenn Reynolds has written three entries specifically about California, and four entries specifically about Jerry Brown (all linking to others, of course). None of them involve this new law or immigration in general.

[1] Note that I'm not including in this discussion those sites that concentrate fully or partly on immigration matters, just major generalist blogs.