NYT: An Undocumented Newspaper

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23691
by Ann Coulter (more by this author)
Posted 11/28/2007 ETUpdated 11/29/2007 ET

Last week, in an article titled "Walking a Tightrope on Immigration," The New York Times made the fact-defying claim that the illegal immigration issue poses a risk for Republicans who appeal to voters "angry" about illegal immigration. (This is as opposed to voters "angry" that they spent good money buying a copy of The New York Times.)In support of this assertion, the Times was required not only to ignore the stunning defeat of this year's amnesty bill, but also to proffer provably absurd evidence. I dearly hope Democratic politicians continue to look to the Times as an accurate barometer of voter sentiment.In addition to secret polls showing that "the majority of Americans" support "a path to citizenship for immigrants here illegally," the Times cited election results from 1994 and 2006 that directly contradict this thesis. First, the Times raised former California Gov. Pete Wilson's "precipitous slide" in the polls after he supported Proposition 187 in 1994, which denied most taxpayer-supported services to illegal immigrants.

The problem with this example is that Proposition 187 was wildly popular with California voters.Times reporter Michael Luo seems to be referring to the Times' own prediction of catastrophe for Proposition 187 -- not actual election results.One week before Californians voted on Proposition 187 in 1994, B. Drummond Ayres Jr. reported in the Times that there had been "a sharp falloff in support for the proposition." He said Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans and African-American ministers were coming out strongly against Proposition 187 and that "this outcry, along with the increasing opposition being voiced by liberals, civil libertarians and assorted national political figures" was having an effect. And then Californians voted. Proposition 187 passed in a landslide with a nearly 20-point margin -- a larger margin than Wilson got, incidentally. It was supported by two-thirds of white voters, half of black and Asian voters, and even one-third of Hispanic voters. It passed in every area of California, except San Francisco, a city where intoxicated gay men dressed as nuns performing sex acts on city streets is not considered unusual. In heavily Latino Los Angeles County, Proposition 187 passed with a 12-point margin.I'm no campaign consultant, but I think Wilson's support for an off-the-charts popular initiative probably didn't hurt him.In fact, here on planet Earth, about the safest thing a California politician could do would be to wildly, vocally support Proposition 187. But in New York Times-speak, politicians are walking a dangerous "tightrope" if they dare to defy a slight majority of San Francisco voters!The initiative went to Carter-appointed U.S. District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer, who issued a permanent injunction and then, in a series of decisions, found the initiative unconstitutional. Her rulings were still on appeal when Democrat Gray Davis became governor and dropped the appeals. Everyone remembers how popular Gray Davis was! (First governor in California history to be recalled.)The crown jewel of the Times' pathetic attempt to marshal evidence for its thesis that Americans want more, not fewer, illegal aliens choking our roads, schools and hospitals also included this gem: "J.D. Hayworth, a hard-line incumbent Republican representative in Arizona, lost his race in 2006, as did Randy Graf, a member of the border-enforcing Minuteman group, who also ran in Arizona.

"How many times do we have to disprove this canard?As with Hillary's position on driver's licenses for illegals -- and B. Hussein Obama's entire campaign -- the Hayworth-Graf example works better when no follow-up questions are allowed. For example:Q: Did Hayworth's and Graf's opponents campaign against them on illegal immigration?A: No.Q: Were there any other issues on the ballot that year that might tell us if it was Hayworth's and Graf's positions on illegals that led to their defeats?A: Si! Oops, I mean, yes -- why, yes there were! The very election that the Times cites as proof that anti-illegal sentiment is a loser at the ballot box also included four measures that passed overwhelmingly: (1) a measure to deny bail to illegal aliens, (2) a measure that would bar illegals from being awarded punitive damages, (3) a measure that would prohibit illegals from receiving state subsidies for education or child care, and (4) a measure to declare English the state's official language.Whatever Arizona voters didn't like about Hayworth and Graf, it wasn't that they were too tough on illegals.My theory is that Hayworth and Graf lost because the multitudes of Times reporters losing their jobs due to the Newspaper of Record's plummeting circulation have recently moved to Hayworth's and Graf's districts. (This is what's known as a "brain drain" in those districts.) My theory -- like the Times' theory -- is supported by no evidence. But unlike the Times' theory, mine is not specifically disproved by other evidence such as common sense, an everyday observation of my fellow man, and also those four anti-illegal immigrant measures passing in landslides in the very same election.

FoxNews recently ran a story claiming that illegal immigration was the new "3rd rail" of politics. We must never forget that a goal right now for pro-illegal immigration groups is to do nothing. Governor Beebe is currently using this strategy by stating he will not call a special session to fix the illegal immigration problem growing in Arkansas.

Illegal alien family values

The NWA Times spends a lot of print trying to claim that out-of wedlock children from illegals are a good thing and that it's America's responsibility. I therefore posted a link to the story onto freerepublic.com. There are 2 sections buried in the story that talk about the true impact of this effect of illegal immigration.



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1930501/posts

A great event coming up!

http://www.clintonschool.uasys.edu/distinguished-speakers/detail.aspx?id=275

Lou Dobbs of CNN, "Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit"
November 27, 2007 -Clinton Presidential Center (Great Hall)

CNN’s Lou Dobbs will make one of his first national appearances to tout his new book, "Independents Day: Awakening the American Spirit,” a look at the critical issues and challenges of the 2008 elections. In the book, Dobbs “examines the public-policy choices over the past 30 years that have eroded individual liberties, disenfranchised the middle class, reduced worker rights and pay, and led the nation into social and political division at home as well as into conflict around the world.” The bestselling author of “War on the Middle Class,” Dobbs is the anchor and managing editor of Lou Dobbs Tonight on CNN. Following the lecture, he will sign copies of his books for guests.

When: Tuesday, November 27, 2007
7:15 p.m. - 8:30 p.m. – Lecture *Book signing to follow.

Where: Statehouse Convention Center
Wally Allen Ballroom *This location has changed becasue of a large crowd

*Reserve your seats by emailing publicprograms@clintonschool.uasys.edu or calling 501.683.5239.



I will only be able to attend the book signing.

_________________________________________

NY governor drops immigrant driver's license plan(Blue States don't like illegal immigration either)

http://www.reuters.com/article/
Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:00pm EST
By Andy Sullivan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer on Wednesday dropped a controversial plan to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants in his state because of overwhelming opposition to the proposal."I've concluded that New York state cannot conduct this program on its own," Spitzer, a Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill news conference. "It does not take a stethoscope to hear the pulse of New Yorkers on this topic."Spitzer's plan had sparked a national debate over the extension of certain privileges to illegal immigrants and haunted Democratic presidential front-runner New York Sen. Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail. Clinton initially said the idea "makes a lot of sense" but then equivocated (flip-flopped)and left her position vague during an October 30 Democratic debate in Philadelphia, prompting her Democratic and Republican rivals to accuse her of engaging in political double-talk.

After Spitzer's decision, her campaign issued a statement from Clinton saying she supported his move and made it clear she opposed granting licenses to illegal immigrants. (which is it?)"As president, I will not support drivers' licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration including border security and fixing our broken system," (I'll just give them amnesty so they can get licenses) Clinton said. Spitzer said he had come to believe that the proposal eventually would be blocked either by legal challenges or by the New York legislature. He said he still believed his plan would be the best way to secure the roads in a state with an estimated 1 million illegal immigrants, many of whom drive without licenses or insurance. (Deporting illegals will secure the roads)

He also criticized the federal government for failing to resolve the problem and said divisive political rhetoric had won out over efforts to reach a practical solution. (amnesty)"The federal government has lost control of its borders, has allowed millions of undocumented immigrants to enter our country and now has no solution to deal with it," Spitzer said at the news conference, where he was joined by Democratic lawmakers from the state. Efforts at a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws (amnesty) collapsed in the U.S. Congress amid a bitter debate on the future of an estimated 12 million immigrants (illegals) in the United States, many of whom are Hispanic.(we don't care about their race) Republican presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor, and Mitt Romney, former Massachusetts governor, said Spitzer's plan would have made it more difficult for the federal government to enforce immigration laws. "It took long enough to convince him and other open-border Democrats like Senator Clinton that driver's licenses for illegal immigrants was exactly the wrong approach to enforcement, but at least Governor Spitzer finally listened to the American people and common sense," Romney said. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose name has been raised as a possible independent presidential candidate, praised Spitzer for attempting to deal with the problem and criticized Washington's inaction. (this liberal may steal votes from the democrat candidate!)
(Additional reporting by JoAnne Allen, editing by David Alexander and Eric Walsh)

____________________________

This was most likely to protect Hillary Clinton for the Democrat Debate tonight. I usually don't watch the Dem debates since all of the candidates are for amnesty or amnesty lite, but this debate might be interesting if the Clinton Campaign hasn't rigged it!

Perhaps Spitzer should have issued the licenses in secret behind the backs of the citizens like the building of the Mexican Consulate in Arkansas. He could create an illegals license center at a New York State Rehab center and have mobile driver's license distributors go around the state. Afterwards, he have secret building project to create a center where illegals can get the licenses and syphon a few thousand tax dollars toward the illegals license center. Then all he has to do is make sure that media outlets give him more airtime than Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo combined and only ask him about his Christian beliefs. Remind you of anybody?

The time is now!

On Monday, radio host Dave Elswick urged citizens to call Mike Beebe and demand a special session to deal with the issue of illegal immigration. I was able to call the show and mention the Arkansas Taxpayer Citizen's Act (HB2779) that had been introduced in the 2007 session by Rep Jon Woods but had died in committee. I also found another immigration reform bill by Woods that required proof of citizenship before getting state benefits (HB2781). This is similar to the legendary SB206 bill that was trashed by Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee. I want to have the links to these bills up on the web so that citizens can see there are solutions to illegal immigration in Arkansas already created. I would urge all citizens to call Mike Beebe's office and demand that he hold a special session so that the state legistlature can vote on HB2781 and HB2779. Although these bills would not completely solve illegal immigration, they are a great start!

Governor Beebe's Contact info:
http://www.governor.arkansas.gov/contacts.html

phone:501-682-2345
fax: 501-682-1382

Requiring Proof of Citizenship for benefits bill.
www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/bills/2007/public/HB2781.pdf

Arkansas Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act
www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/bills/2007/public/HB2779.pdf

Suit focuses on Tyson relationship with advocacy group

BY MICHELLE BRADFORD
Posted on Monday, November 5, 2007
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/206766/

The plaintiffs in a lawsuit accusing Tyson Foods Inc. of hiring illegal aliens to work at poultry plants are focusing on the meat producer’s relationship with the League of Latin American Citizens. (pro-illegal group) The class-action suit in U. S. District Court in Eastern Tennessee claims Springdale-based Tyson Foods knowingly hired illegal aliens to work for wages below what American workers would take.(what's happening everywhere) It was filed in April 2002 on behalf of former Tyson workers in several states, not including Arkansas. Trial is set for March 3. (5 years just to start Trial?)

The plaintiffs in Trollinger v. Tyson are chicken plant workers who said they were harmed by a scheme by Tyson’s top management to depress wages, court documents state. “We believe Tyson has used its relationship with LULAC to help carry out a ‘willful blindness’ policy of hiring illegal workers,” said the plaintiffs ’ attorney, Howard W. Foster of Chicago. “Tyson is very close with LULAC, especially in Springdale, and we’re alleging that the groups have agreed not to investigate workers who are suspected illegal aliens.” Last week, the former director of the Arkansas chapter of the League of Latin American Citizens filed a motion to avoid giving a deposition in the case. In October, LULAC’s Housing Commission fought subpoenas seeking evidence in the case.

Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson said the company continues to deny claims in the suit and will file a motion for summary judgment mid-month. “We have a zero-tolerance policy for hiring people who are not authorized to work in the United States,” Mickelson said. “We value our relationships with various advocacy groups, including those representing the Hispanic community. Claims that those relationships are improper are not only false, but they are absurd.”

An amended complaint filed in 2005 added the allegation that Tyson used its relationship with LULAC to “facilitate the hiring of illegal aliens.” Foster wouldn’t elaborate beyond what is in the complaint. Charles Cervantes, director of the Arkansas chapter of LULAC, said the league’s partnership with Tyson is geared at Hispanic advocacy efforts, such as curbing poverty and improving education. “We would never tell Tyson or any of our corporate sponsors to hire undocumented workers,” Cervantes said. (It's the other way around)“Absolutely not. Nor would we turn our heads to that. Besides, LULAC doesn’t tell its sponsors how to operate. That’s not our format.” Tyson is one of many corporations across the country, including Wal-Mart Stores Inc., with which LULAC has “corporate sponsorships,” he said.

LULAC is not a defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs, however, have been gathering third-party evidence from the nonprofit league, including taking a deposition in August of LULAC national executive director Brent Wilkes, court records show. Foster said the suit is filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Practices Act, alleging Tyson committed wrongdoing by working with other groups or organizations.

It’s one of the first suits to allege “illegal immigrant hiring scheme” under the RICO law, he said. Last week, R. Shawn McGrew, former Arkansas LULAC executive director, filed a motion in U. S. District Court in Fayetteville to quash a subpoena to give a deposition in the case. McGrew couldn’t be reached and his attorney, Ray Niblock of Fayetteville, didn’t return calls. The motion states that the plaintiffs want to ask Mc-Grew about whether he lobbied against Arkansas anti-immigration legislation, in particular, Act 907 of 2005, which authorized the State Police to designated officers to enforce federal immigration law.

Last month, 19 officers in Washington and Benton counties began working under the supervision of U. S. Immigration Customs Enforcement under what’s known as the 287 (g ) program. Cervantes said LULAC opposes local police enforcing federal immigration law because it creates opportunities for racial profiling and can violate the rights of people who can’t immediately produce identification when asked by police. LULAC can exercise its First Amendment right to express its views on pending legislation when it pleases, Cervantes said. “If Shawn [McGrew ] went and lobbied against 287 (g ), that’s OK,” said Cervantes, who succeeded McGrew as state director in 2006. “That’s his American right.” Foster said LULAC’s National Housing Commission fought a subpoena last month but has since agreed to turn over documents. He wouldn’t say what the documents are.

The Housing Commission helps low- to moderate-income Hispanics with housing needs and issues, according to its Web site. Foster said other evidence in the suit includes depositions with and computer hard-drive evidence from defendants, who include John Tyson, chairman of the Tyson board of directors; Archie Schaffer III, a senior vice president; and Richard Bond, chief executive officer.

Defendants in the suit are not the same former Tyson bosses who were indicted in 2001 in U. S. District Court in Tennessee on charges of conspiring to smuggle illegal aliens for work. (another corruption story!) A jury acquitted those three defendants in 2003. “Those were mid-level managers,” Foster said. “These defendants are top executives.” Mickelson said the civil suit is largely based on claims made in the failed 2001 federal indictments.
____________________________________

Here's another corruption story about Tyson Foods:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907681/posts