Friday, June 4, 2010

Curious reporting

Those arbiters of mainstream America, musicians and artists, are at it by speaking out against Arizona's illegal immigrant law and organizing boycotts of Arizona while some are refusing to perform there.

Check out this paragraph from the L.A. Times regarding this activism and ask yourself if the author just beamed down from another planet.

While opinion polls indicate that most voters in the U.S., including California, are deeply deeply divided over the Arizona law, it's doubtful that groups like Ozomatli and Rage Against the Machine need worry about alienating members of their multicultural, politically left-leaning fan bases. In a statement released this week, De la Rocha expressed concern that Arizona's SB 1070 could lead to fans of the group being "pulled over and harassed … because they are brown or black, or for the way they speak, or for the music they listen to."

(italics, ours)

If by deeply divided over Arizona's law, they mean that 69% of Americans favor it, then by all means this country is deeply divided.

And about those boycotts? Rasmussen found that 68% don't like the idea of boycotting Arizona while only 14% (which most likely accounts for the fan base of the bands/artists either calling for a boycott and/or refusing to play in Arizona) are in favor of it.

Do you think that perhaps reporting like this is the reason why the future of newsies is on the ropes? Don't sweat it, L.A. Times... help is on the way.


SarahB said... can't live with them, you can't live without them (sigh)

Benito said...

I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.

I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!

Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.

Dean said...

Benito, I totally agree that every human being be treated with respect and dignity. Perhaps respecting the rule of law and the borders of another nation would be part of that, yes?

I'm sure you have very good intentions but the messaging of (and I'll use this very sweeping and generalized term loosely) "your side" absolutely stinks. How does boycotting help anything? Who but the people at the low end of the wage scale, the people you want to be treated with respect, get hurt most with boycotting?

I agree, the majority is not always right. In that respect, you have to win over the hearts and minds of the majority and right now "your side" is failing in spectacluar fashion. Need to step up your game.

K T Cat said...

Benito, that was an awesome cut and paste job! I couldn't have hit ctrl-v better myself.

Dude, here's another option for you. Trying living in a place where there is no respect for law at all. Pick one, there's lots of them. Somalia, Darfur, Ciudad Juarez - they're all great places. After that, come on back over and let us know what it's like in a paradise where borders, private property and legal protection mean nothing.

I'm all ears.

B-Daddy said...

The boycott is a horrible idea, because the Arizonans are only responding to the rank hypocrisy of the federal policy as implemented, which leaves them to deal with all the criminals on their own.

Benito, no other government in the world allows anyone to just mosey across their borders. This is only being asked of the United States. In fact, a key element of national sovereignty is control of one's own borders. Without this control, a nation might be considered a failed state. Perhaps larger immigration quotas might alleviate this problem, but never, never expect a sovereign nation to allow unfettered access across its borders. There is no right to cross borders, it is disrespectful to cross borders illegally. If would be immigrants want the rights that Americans enjoy under the constitution, they must respect our laws. Could our laws be better? Of courses. But they still demand our respect.