Sunday, July 23, 2006

Deconstructing the LA Times Article on Arkadelphia Illegal Alien Raid

So why would the Los Angeles Times assign staff writer Molly Hennessy-Fiske to write this long story talking about how wrong it was for the Immigration Control and Enforcement (ICE) division to round up the 120 illegal aliens in Arkadelphia last year?

The story is designed to manipulate your emotions into sympathy for the illegals and to show that the community of Arkadelphia was against the raid.

My best guess is that Governor Huckabee has hired a campaign staff or publicist that has connections with the L.A. Times. Nationwide polling data of Republicans shows that Huckabee has negatives over twice as high as his positives. Perhaps a good part of the reason is his warm-and-fuzzy attitude toward illegal aliens when the vast majority of Americans want illegal immigration stopped. Somehow, Huckabee must have gotten some strings pulled in an effort to clean up his image.

It is possible that Arkansas media will be tempted to pick this one up in an effort to hammer you into submission on the issue. I for one am tired of seeing you and I made to look like heartless bigots for simply insisting that we must all follow the law, so as a public service, I will deconstruct the article.

(continued- for rest of article, including a deconstruction of the LA Times Propaganda Piece, click "Sunday" below and scroll down, or if sent straight here just scroll down).


Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

A wise old preacher once told me that "emotions make a good caboose but a bad engine." The Big-money forces want an endless supply of cheap labor even if it means cheating the average American citizen through reduced wages and safety. They don't care if the illegals they bring in suck up a lot of social services, and wind up in prision for other crimes at a far higher rate than legal citizens, because they pay only a tiny fraction of total taxes, but get 100% of the benefits on the cheap illegal labor they sneak in. These special interests are using their heads to try and get us to forget about using ours. They are trying to manipulate our emotions so that we will submit to policies that our heads tell us are not in anybody's best interest. Not ours, and in the long run not even the illegal alien's. Letting our emotions decide government policy is a receipe for disaster.

The Sheriff of the County is the main resident in the article who is quoted as sympathetic to the illegal aliens as a whole. He said, "We take them into our public schools. We accept them into our churches. They play on our football, soccer teams," said Troy Tucker, the county sheriff at the time of the raid. "And then one day Immigration comes in and sweeps them all away."

I am happy that they accepted people from a different culture. That is the humane thing to do (that is, the Christian humane thing to do, the "humane" things people do to outsiders in non-Christian cultures is typically to oppress if not exterminate them). It is normal to feel bad when you lose a church member, or team mate, to a law enforcement action. Especially if you do not feel you were one of the victims. They never did anything wrong to you or yours that you knew of.

While that emotion is normal, to let it decide social policy is nothing short of madness. The same emotional effect occurs when any group of criminals are rounded up. If you can remember back when the FBI was cracking down on the Mafia, every time some were arrested you could see people on TV going, "hey I knew them, they were good guys, we went to Mass together, Tony donated the money for the community center" and so forth. Those who knew them as other than criminals were willing to overlook the fact that the Mafioso broke the kneecaps of a stranger last week. Hey, he was nice to them. So pliable are our emotions on this level that we can even cheer for a fictional TV character, Tony Soprano, to "beat the rap" even though we see some of their crimes!

Illegal aliens are criminals. People who would sneak into another country without permission are much more likely to commit other crimes. Indeed, many steal the identities of other people- ruining their credit, getting their insurance rates raised throug accident, and in general making a mess of someone else's life. That is what put ICE onto this plant in the first place. There was someone in the area selling fake ID's. One crime leads to the next to cover it up, and so on.

The story relates how a prominent family, the Klucks, took the single-mother Servanda Hernandez under their wing. They assumed she was a legal immigrant. They took her children all over the country on vacation. They had them in their own home for the holidays. They even raised $20,000 to send the oldest daughter to Ouachita. Then they did it again for her younger sister. The Klucks sound like fantastic caring people, and the world needs more like them. But as much as love as they has shown her and her family, Servanda Hernandez was hiding something from them. She was an illegal alien. Now the Klucks, people of big heart it is clear, are trying to help Hernandez stay in the US. That is right, even though the story focuses on her to highlight the unfairness of the deportations, Hernandez has not actually been deported!

It is a safe bet that the two illegal families the story focuses on the two most sympathetic families. It does not mention the ones that were single males who used to get drunk every Friday and harrass the women, or get in knife fights. It does not reference any that were caught stealing, or committing welfare fraud, or even DWI. It only chronicles the story of the two women, even though the vast majority of illegal immigrants from Mexico are young men.

Yet even here, they had to find someone who had not actually been deported! The article states,"Of the 119 detained workers, only Hernandez and six others were not deported. They were released without bail to await hearings before an immigration judge. The judge could grant Hernandez legal residency if she shows that, among other things, she has no criminal record, has children who are U.S. citizens and that they would suffer "extremely unusual hardship" if she is deported."

You see, in addition to the children she had from the man in Mexico, a person she described as "abusive", she has had three more children since entering the United States! That of course, "entitles" her to have "applied for federal food assistance and Medicaid for the three children she had since entering the United States". She is a "single mother". No mention is made of the whereabouts of any of the fathers of these three American-born children.

Look, the Kluck's are still helping her out, as are others. If that is what they want to do with their own money then that is their business. What happens with United States tax dollars is all of our business. I for one am sick of subsidizing that lifestyle. If I had to look into her face, my heart may tell me different, but the plain fact is that I know with my head that the taxpayers of the United States cannot afford to pay the bills for our own "single mothers", much less the world's. My head also tells me that it is not in the long term best interests of children or the country to do so.

10:18 AM, July 23, 2006  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

I have less sympathy for one Krystal Williams, a 23-year old college student, than for the Klucks. When her friend, Dalia Vidal, was deported, Williams took care of her daughter. So far so good. But Vidal phoned from Mexico and said she wanted to sneak back in, but hinted that she needed money. Williams gave it to her. Vidal hired a coyote to sneak her back. I believe it is a felony to sneak back into America once you have been deported. That would mean that young Krystal Williams is guilty of aiding and abetting a felon. Why didn't she use the money to take the daughter- who apparently is also a foriegn national, back to their home country? Emotion. Now Vidal is back in the US, as are apparently 60% of the deported workers (what a testimony to our lack of border control). But where can she go, what can she do? She can't even speak English. She can continue to suck off of Williams and others as long as they will tolerate it, or she can go home.

10:28 AM, July 23, 2006  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

I fear that both the Kluck's and especially Miss Williams are going to learn a painful lesson about the limits on helping people. There is no good end to this. Adherence to the law, which seems so harsh in the individual case, actually proves more merciful to all in the long run. If everyone understands where the lines are, they are rarely crossed, when various subgroups set about underminding the law and blurring the lines, it encourages people to get themselves in precarious places. To see this requires putting the rational faculty above the shifting sands of emotional indulgence.

10:33 AM, July 23, 2006  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

I went over to the Arktimes blog to sample some of their tolerant liberalism. A person made a tongue in cheeck post about how all muslims are terroriss and all hispanics are illegal.

A poster who called himself "hugh maan", get it? posted the following....

"If there is a hell you, Holt, and your attitude are headed there.

You need to quit thinking of and referring to yourself as Christian, because you certainly are not following the teachings of Christ."

I wrote back to the effect that it was nice to see liberal tolerence in action, and that I know Jim Holt well and have never heard him outright say that another human being is going to Hell. Yet here was this 'tolerant liberal" ready to consign Holt and the joker poster to Hell. The fool does not even know if there is a Hell, but sounds 100% confident that he knows who is going there based on HIS FEELINGS. Then he signs himself as "humane".

I DID post something to this effect, but the tolerant liberals who run the Times blog deleted my post! That is their kind of free expression! That is their method of debate- silence the opposition.

Emotions, not logic and fact, rule in liberal land. This is exremely dangerous. Law and order will vanish entirely if one refuses to follow the law based soley on their level of emotional attachment to the lawbreaker. This will leave a world where no ones rights are safe.

The easy thing to do is give into whatever emotion you feel at the moment, or whatever requires the least courage and effort from you. The right thing to do is usually the hardest- because the Universe is Designed by God to test us.

The right thing to do is to apply the law equally. Any help they want to give those families can be given helping them get a better life in Mexico. Mexico is full of unfortunate people that need and deserve help and have not broken any of our laws.

12:41 PM, July 23, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So where did a 23 year old college student get $1,800 to get her illegal back into America? Could it possibly be that she is gettng FINANCIAL AID as a student?

4:30 PM, July 23, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where in the world do you get the idea that Huck pulled strings to get the LA Times to come and do this piece?

Sounds like a lot of speculation aimed at his credibility. I can't think of a single argument you have made against him that is based on anything but dislike and pettiness. It's easy to find (or make up) things against someone you don't like.

As much as I appreciate the strength in convictions that you display, they go too far when you assume a monopoly on the definition of christian actions. Leviticus 25 sounds alot like liberalism/socialism to me at some points. Whether or not it is, isn't the point. The point is that there is room for discussion and implementation of policy within the biblical framework, which you deny.

The bible isn't some simple tool that can blanketly cover and refute every specific case and argument that you disagree with. It is full of some specifics, but mostly principles. The application of which is mostly imparted through motivation than strenuous regimentation. I see too often on this blog attempts to prove yourself right, than diligently seeking of what is right in the first place. Your answer may be in line with those principles, but that doesn't mean that other views are necessarily excluded because you found one perspective. If you don't leave room to be at least somewhat wrong, then you won't have room to pursue what is ultimatly right.

I hope your usual readers aren't as credulous as you hope.

8:04 PM, July 23, 2006  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...

You have said exactly nothing, while assuming the tone of moral superiority that you accuse me of. Hey, I started off by asking the question, "Why would the LA Times write an article about a raid on an Arkansas Chicken plant that took place a year ago?"

Well, you tell me why then. Since the article is an attempt to justify Governor Huckabee's pro-illegal positions, and since he is running for President, and since politiicans do hire people to try to get favorable media for them, I reached a logical conclusion. If you have another theory as to why the LA Times would do this, then let's hear it. It is an open forum.

As far as pettiness goes, you are the first person in memory that has accused me of that. The Governor on the other hand, has been accussed of pettiness a lot more often. But rather than argue with you about who is petty, let's discuss what the facts are and what they mean.

What do you mean by "assume a monopoly on Christian actions"? What are you even talking about? Would I be "assuming a monopoly on Christian actions" if I said being honest was the thing that Christian should do and cheating people is unchristian? What about if I maintained that staying faithful to your spouse was the Christian position, and commiting adultery was unChristian?

And how on earth did you ever reach the conclusion that I leave "no room for discussion"? This is an open blog. You don't even have to be a member, or ID yourself, to comment on it. This whole thing is a "room for discussion" online. Someone such as myself advances a position that we believe is correct, and the bloggers can scrutinize it. If they discover some flaw, I am forced to revise my thinking. It is basically the scientific method.

No, Leviticus 25 does not sound like socialism. The only thing close is the Jubilee, which in modern times we emulate with bankrupcy laws. By the way, I was against the recent tightening of those laws which makes bankruptcy for poor people useless but still allows the rich to escape their debts.

The main thing you need to remember about all those Old Testament commands to give to your poor neighbor is that there were no CIVIL PENALTIES attached to your failure to be generous to your poor neighbor. You were required under penalty of law to be JUST, but only exhorted to be MERCIFUL. This is unlike todays situation where you are threatened with prison if you don't pony up and pay for our plethora of failed social programs.

I see too often on this blog attempts to prove yourself right, than diligently seeking of what is right in the first place.

Again sir or madam, what are you talking about? Of course I advance a position and then defend it, but why do you assume I have not "diligently sought what is right in the first place"? One advances a position and defends it, other attempt to add to it or detract from it. In this manner, all who will gain wisdom. That is the process here. Your complaint about the process is based on an assumption that I have not thought my position out, if I have not, then show me the error of my ways.

Your answer may be in line with those principles, but that doesn't mean that other views are necessarily excluded because you found one perspective. If you don't leave room to be at least somewhat wrong, then you won't have room to pursue what is ultimatly right.

Again, you assume that I will not modify my principles when confronted with logic and fact that shows my position untenable. You pull this assumption out of thin air. I have been leaving room for the possiblity I am wrong for over forty years as I constantly studied God's standards for civil government and other issues. I did not leap forth from the womb with my current ideas.

It is because I went through that process that I arrived at my current conclusions. If you wish me to alter them, you are going to have to use fact and reason, not assumption and innuendo.

If YOU are not careful you can overdo that "that doesn't mean that other views are necessarily excluded because you found one perspective" business and refuse to accept the truth when you do find it. Truth is by its nature intolerent and exclusive, even if we must be tolerent of new ideas and inclusive of others ideas in order to help us find it. 2+2=4 is the truth, and that excludes other possiblities such as 2+2=7, no matter how much I like the number 7. I would hate to cross a bridge built with "tolerent math".

5:41 AM, July 24, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

9:18 AM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm impressed with your site, very nice graphics!

2:35 PM, August 10, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your are Excellent. And so is your site! Keep up the good work. Bookmarked.

11:32 PM, August 15, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]quarkxpress tips, [url=]commerce shop software[/url]
[url=][/url] adobe software sale X4 Retail Price
downloadable hindi software [url=]adobe software license[/url] photo software downloads
[url=]7 Mac[/url] discount software for educators
[url=]cheap word software[/url] cheap oem org software
sell software downloads [url=]software in stores[/url][/b]

3:41 AM, January 02, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[b]can i buy microsoft software, [url=]software resellers canada[/url]
[url=]educators discount software[/url] error 1606 coreldraw buy photoshop cs
buying dreamweaver [url=]nero 9 cracked[/url] vio software discount
[url=]a shop software[/url] is quarkxpress 8 compatible with quarkxpress 7
[url=]2007 discount software[/url] nero 7 serial
acdsee pro download free [url=]latest adobe software[/url][/b]

9:25 AM, January 12, 2010  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home