Liberal Activists Overwhelm Opposing Voices at MSNBC's Immigration Town Hall
MSNBC's prime-time "town hall" on immigration reform yesterday exemplified one of the more unseemly elements of media bias: brazen political advocacy disguised as an "honest conversation."
Attempting to pass itself off as a forum for voices on all sides of the immigration issue to elevate the dialogue, "Beyond Borderlines" featured droves of liberal guests who dismissed, admonished, and overwhelmed only token conservative opposition.
From the outset of the program, conservative guests were disadvantaged and drowned out. The "conversation," which touched on a wide-range of issues related to immigration reform, was steered by hosts Lawrence O'Donnell, who is a self-described socialist, and Maria Teresa Kumar, who is executive director of Voto Latino, a liberal immigration reform group.
Mike Cutler, one of the few guests who offered a contrasting perspective on the issue, was repeatedly attacked by Kumar, who oscillated between the conflicting roles of questioner and answerer, and the other panelists.
When Cutler, who served 30 years as an INS agent, proposed enforcing federal law to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants currently living in America, Kumar snapped back: "I think what the picture that Mr. Cutler is providing, actually, would devastate the United States economy – period."
O'Donnell took over the reins from there, encouraging Rosario Dawson, actress and co-founder of Voto Latino, to gang up on Cutler: "Rosario, what we're hearing from Mike is the strict enforcement school. And it seems to me it sounds a little bit like Arizona on steroids. How do you think that [illegal immigrants] would react to the kinds of things Mike is talking about? Do you think we would see this mass migration back across the southern border of tens of millions of people because they can't get a checking account?"
Dawson's response, instead of helping to shed light on a complicated public policy issue, distorted Arizona's popular immigration law: "SB-1070 is a law that makes us have to go around and point to people, are you a criminal? No. Are you a criminal? How about you?"
The actor/activist's own solution for dealing with the current illegal immigrant population mangled the conservative perspective and invoked racial overtones: "We can't keep going back to old pieces of paper, because according to old pieces of paper, I'm not allowed to vote and as a person of color, you weren't even considered a full human being. So, that's why we need to inject humanity into this situation."
Building on the recurring theme of mischaracterizing those who oppose liberal solutions to immigration reform, O'Donnell reflected on Nevada Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle's "demonizing" campaign ad, and Dawson hinted that Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio condoned "voter intimidation" to keep illegal aliens from voting in the 2010 election.
Later in the two-hour program, O'Donnell capitalized on a viewer tweet to take cheap-shots at Cutler and conservative opponents: "Many small govt types yell abt sending undocumented ppl 'back.' What size govt agency would they create to execute this?" After reading the tweet, O'Donnell pressed Cutler: "You have estimated 30 million undocumented people in this country. How many millions of government workers would you have to hire to move them back across the border?"
To his credit, Cutler remained calm under pressure, attempting to redirect the discussion away from such a blatantly partisan topic. But Kumar, refusing to let Cutler talk about the real issue, picked up where O'Donnell left off: "You keep criminalizing the undocumented and that's not acceptable because they're workers, right? They're workers. They're parents. And they serve in our military. That is not okay."
Kumar, O'Donnell, and Dawson paid lip-service to border security, but their unvarnished opinion on securing the southern border was apparent every time they spewed invective at Cutler for supporting strong border enforcement measures.
At the top of the show, O'Donnell introduced a video featuring residents of Fremont, Nebraska, who discussed their concerns over the influx of illegal aliens into their community. During the second-hour, Dolores Huerta, described by O'Donnell as a "legendary co-founder" of the United Farm Workers Union, accused the residents of Fremont of being racist:
When we talk about the people that were recruited to work in the meat packing plants in Nebraska, if those were Canadians, you would not have that problem that you are seeing there. It would be very, very different...It's against the people of color. It's against the people from Mexico and the people from Central America and Latin America.
For lobbing such a baseless and insulting accusation, Huerta received not one iota of criticism from the rest of the liberal panel.
To illustrate the extent of MSNBC"s duplicity, even one of the so-called "conservative" guests was brought on to scold conservatives. Alfonso Aguilar, executive director of a Latino Partnerships for Conservative Principles, lambasted Sharron Angle and Tom Tancredo, among others, who have "actually hijacked the discussion of immigration within Republican ranks." Aguilar also implored Republicans to fight for "something constructive that goes beyond just enforcement-only options."
Throughout the "conversation," O'Donnell solicited audience questions, comments, and emails, most of which reinforced the viewpoints of the liberal guests. One audience member alluded to her disdain for Cutler before railing against America's "colonization and marginalization" of Latin America.
Another audience member took a pot-shot at Susana Martinez: "Governor-elect from New Mexico, Republican, ran on the platform of fear and really enforcing immigration laws, but had no knowledge of the DREAM Act, which is one of the most prominent, you know, legislation that is actually going to be in the lame duck session hopefully this upcoming week."
One of the only fair-minded guests, Telemundo's Jose Diaz-Balart extended a genuine olive branch to Cutler and proponents of strict enforcement:
But let's also see if there's not a common ground that we can find with the ranchers that are in the Arizona border and that feel that they should have the right to not have untold hundreds of people coming through their property every week, and they don't know who they are, and they may be led by a guy with an AK-47, who back home in Mexico was cutting heads off. Everyone has a right to be safe.
Unfortunately, few of the guests and neither host shared Diaz-Balart's level-headedness.
As NewsBusters reported back in May, MSNBC's biased coverage of immigration reform is nothing new. The cable network's "A Nation Divided" series drowned out the conservative message with a deluge of liberal guests and loaded questions designed to advance the liberal argument. Just like its predecessor, "Beyond Borderlines" failed to live up to its name.
- Alex Fitzsimmons's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
MSNBC can play their stupid
Submitted by Van Halen on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 5:59pm.
MSNBC can play their stupid little games. Why would ANY Conservative fall for it anyway?
But the Republicans are in the majority now for the House at least and we can hammer them to start funding the wall, cameras, drones and troops to the border. Additionally, we have to demand accountability - when an illegal is picked up AN ILLEGAL IS DEPORTED!!
Stupid....
Submitted by tampamom25 on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 6:01pm.
Whenever a liberal gets in the conversation, it immediately becomes a matter of race. I don't believe we have a problem with illegals (remember that word, against the law???) coming in from Canada. They come from our southern borders which are where Latinos live, and that's why the issue is pointed at those of Latino heritage. Everything isn't about race you stupid people!
When he spoke of Canadians
Submitted by dirtydan64 on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 11:44pm.
who might be working on farms, I would have told O'Donnell that we don't have near as much a problem along any part of the Canadian border like we do along the Mexican border cause no one crosses the border either from Canada coming into the US or leaving the US going across into Canada do we Lawrence ? And then I would have said you know why Lawrence cause they enforce the laws up there hey !!!!
ACHTUNG! Meeting tonight!
Submitted by Herbster on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 6:29pm.
Cutler and Diaz-Balart were like two Jews at a Bund meeting! I watched most of this intellectual travesty "Moderated" by Lawrence O'Donnell and Maria Kumar - the Frick and Frack of today's Communist Party agenda. O'Donnell was in his usual arrogant mode and Maria Kumar had nice legs. Intellectually, she was right up there with Contessa Brewer. Kumar continually spouted leftist inanities in response to Mr. Cutler - and the audience made up of winners of the cretin of the week contest, would applaud......and look at each other as if to say, "What did she say?" The Huerta-hag piled on with the usual Marxist musings. O'Donnell used the usual snarky argumennts/comments in response to Diaz-Balart and Cutler. He used the Chris Matthews interrupt-the-conservative ploy continually. The audience was truly scary. Obviously recruited, (SIEU? La Raza?) types......low sloping foreheads and close set eyes types. Audience questions appeared to be more deeply planted than mrs. obama's sweet potatoes!
It was a farce, a travesty, with an agenda driven template, but at the same time, a lesson to be learned. These people are dangerous. They hold sway and influence over a large segment of the population by speaking in welcome platitudes and smearing any opposition with third grade "Logic" and mantras such as "Living in the shadows, breaking up families, etc." The appeal is to FEELINGS, not the intellect. Very dangerous. These folks are practicioners of "Change by incrementalism." Get the camel's nose under the tent...........then we move to step two.
In the 30's, the Germans said, "It can't happen here." But it did. We hear the same thing in our Country today - it can't happen here....but it IS happening. All you had to do was watch this propaganda push on TV last night. We live in dangerous times and need to wake up before it's too late. The barbarians are no longer at the gate - they are all around us.
The "low sloping foreheads and close set eyes types"
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 6:50pm.
How very 30's/German of you.
Indeed, it can happen here.
Jer
And how very politically correct of you, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 8:10pm.
to take offense.
What a proud little liberal you are.
What's that you say?
You heaped scorn on Harry Reid for mentioning Obamas' selective dialect, and Robert Byrd for using the phrase "white nigger", and all those Democratic Party and media libs who complained that the Pelosi "gavel walk" gave rise to the most severe and nasty declension of the word "negro" without a single solitary iota of proof of same?
Well, never mind, then.
MD
You dismiss that as a
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 10:58pm.
You dismiss that as a "politically correct" comment?
How very interesting.
Jer
And you see the comment as what,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 11/17/2010 - 12:31am.
an anthropological one?
How very odd.
MD
Oddly enough, I
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 11/17/2010 - 12:48am.
Oddly enough, I intepreted the description of anthropological traits to be an anthropological comment.
How did you interpret the words employed? Metaphorically?
Perhaps the construction I applied was too literal, but hardly odd. Not nearly so odd as your critique, anyhow.
Jer
Metaphorically would cover it---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 11/17/2010 - 12:59am.
as SEIU - La Raza "types" as thugs with low brows and close set eyes works for me.
As a lib Jer, seems most of what you consider literal (actual, obvious), I, as a conservative, see as an odd way to think.
Why would that make for an odd critique?
MD
It already has. Middle-class
Submitted by ozarkian on Sat, 11/20/2010 - 4:38am.
It already has. Middle-class White Tea Partiers are denigrated and called named daily just for being middle-class Whites. The remark you object to is no different from the "looking out at a sea of white faces" description in every media report of a tea party rally.
Cry Me a River! Not All Latinos Agree with this Liberal Crap.
Submitted by gruyere cheese on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 7:20pm.
I am for Immigration reform. Give Illegals an ID and temporary status with limitations.
They should:
Work, pay taxes, social security, medicare, pay for hospital visits, and abide by the law. However, as non-citizens they have to first become naturalized Americans in order to vote. That is the trade off.
I can guarantee you that IF, illegal immigrants have to pay to the Federal Government the way Americans do, having no money to send home to take care of the family and build their retirement home in their country, most of them will rather remain illegal. Because, they can work, get paid under the table, send money home, buy property in their country and move back when there time is up. The money they earn is not invested back in this country. Instead, is the American dollars that they send home that keep the economy moving in ther country, NOT THE US.
I am a naturalized American Citizen and I often ashamed of people like Ms. Rosario Dawson and this Maria Teresa "Kumar". They do not represent the rest of us Latino/Americans who love this country and work hard to be where we are.
I feel sorry for these Latinos who listen to the crap the Liberals feed them in the news! In the end, just like Obama's little auntie who lives in Boston, Latinos end up feeling as if this country owes them because they choose to come here and work in the farm fields or in the factories. This is their choice, they are not forced to come here at gun point.
These Latinos are not smart enough to see that this government is no different than the one in their country. They want you to be dependent of them in every sense of the way so they can intrude in your life and dictate your future and that of your family!
Ay Caramba!
All right, Dude!
Submitted by ozarkian on Sat, 11/20/2010 - 4:35am.
What you said.
What's wrong with this picture?
Submitted by TempusFugit on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 7:38pm.
"...and Dawson hinted that Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio condoned "voter intimidation" to keep illegal aliens from voting in the 2010 election." Voter intimidation was used to keep illegal aliens from voting?????? Silly me, but I thought laws were used to keep illegals from voting. I'm so glad I have celebrities to teach me about the way things really work ....../sarc Ms. Dawson you are truly an idiot. I guess you'll be getting your own primetime MSNBC show very soonI really dont see teh big
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 7:42pm.
I really dont see teh big problem with sending the illegal aliens back to where they came from. We need to militarize the southern border, it is imperative.
The simple logistics of taking 12...
Submitted by TempusFugit on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 7:54pm.
...to 30 million (depending on whose estimate you believe) people back to the southern border probably precludes just simply deporting them. But if you take away their jobs, lose the anchor baby provision and stop them from stealing from social programs then they'll go back voluntarily. That was proven in Arizona when immigrant neighborhoods became virtual ghost towns when SB 1070 was about to take effect, before a federal court gutted most of it. If every state had an Arizona type law the problem would solve itself
There is really no problem as
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 11:56pm.
There is really no problem as it does not have to be intantaeous. Lest say you do a million per week, so in thirty weeks its done or even less but the trick is to do it. And to close the border. Once the illegal population knows we are deporting then they will start self deporting also. We need to plug the leak first by militarizing teh border.
It is imperative for national security we plug the border and stop the unregulated traffic. Who knows what is being smuggled accross?
The Ugly Truth
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 11/17/2010 - 1:30am.
As many of my fellow NB'ers know, we spent 6 months this year in Latin America.
Guess what? Every single country there employs armed (could be cops, Army or Marines, depending upon the country) check points....where you MUST show your papers, and generally comply with any other requests, which include pulling over, opening your vehicle, allowing them to look through one's belongings, etc.
In many countries (the relatively richer ones, actually, bordering on the commie Nico & El Salvador)....the personnel at the checkpoints empty ALL buses....this is done to halt...illegal immigration!
Believe it or not, Mexico and Costa Rica have illegal problems....wierd, huh? Yet the Mexican Government decries our attempt at controlling illegals....going so far as to give aide and assistance (maps, etc.) to those who would bust the border.
We need to fire a hundred thousand DC bureaucrats, and replace them with armed border patrols, on horseback, in aircraft, in Humvees, all along our Southern Border. With loaded weapons. Any trespassers who won't stop on order, shoot first and sort it out later. This would do a couple of things....stop the drug lords, and the human traffikers. Oh yeah....strip Big Sis and dump her out in the middle of the desert....and let the animals sniff her junk. Get the lady's Freek off, once and for all (sorry, I am p'o'd about this TSA nonsense).
P.S. Speaking of "illegal" probs in Costa Rica (Uns will verify this)...one of our favorite restaurants was run by our neighbors, Jack & Penny (from Oz, legal, tho, LOL). It was right on the beach in Brasalito. There was a great little Mariachi band (3 guys)....we went there one day, and they were gone. Penny said the Costa Rican ICE guys rounded them up one day at lunch. They were back a week or so later.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
How 'bout if we say, if you
Submitted by ozarkian on Sat, 11/20/2010 - 4:41am.
How 'bout if we say, if you go back by yourself, that's all there is to it. If we have to deport you, you can spend 30 days in jail as a minor consequence. And don't say we don't have the space; we'd never have to actually have it.
Open Borders Crowd
Submitted by SnapTie on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 8:08pm.
I tried to watch it,But O'Donnell lost me when he said this is funny we are standing on land that was Mexico and now we have a imaginary line between the countries.
I wish I could remember where
Submitted by ant on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 8:37pm.
I wish I could remember where the article was (American Thinker, maybe?). But some time ago I read a great article about what makes any nation's land their land is the willingness to keep it their land. The left does not have that willingness, I guarantee it. In the history of the world, parts of the globe have been inhabited by so many different cultures that anybody with a claim would find themselves just handing it back to the next people in line. Mexicans can whine all they want, there are enough Americans that call themselves 'Americans" who will fight to keep it.
You beat me to it, SnapTie
Submitted by ProudAmerican58 on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 9:05pm.
Once I heard him say "imaginary line" I knew this would be just another open borders/pro-illegal immigrant commercial. I realize the fact that it was on MSNBC and hosted by Lawrence O'Donnel should have tipped me off from the beginning but I guess a bit of residual "liberal naivite" creeped into my bloodsteam and adversely affected my brain.
I Hate when that happens!
So he thinks the legal,
Submitted by ozarkian on Sat, 11/20/2010 - 4:43am.
So he thinks the legal, established U.S. border is the equator?
Shame on Cutler and the rest
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 11:33pm.
Shame on Cutler and the rest of the whoever conservative guests were for participating in what amounted to a kangaroo town hall meeting. When will these people ever learn that they will not get a fair and honest airing of their views on MSNBC? Let only liberals appear with only other liberals while only other liberals watch. Keep MSNBC a liberal isolation zone.
For that matter
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 11:38pm.
The Right should boycott mslsd's debates like the dimwits did Fox.
That's what I'm saying. Let
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 11/16/2010 - 11:50pm.
That's what I'm saying. Let MSNBC stand by itself on the outskirts of reality with ONLY liberals sitting around agreeing with each other. Soon, even their liberal audience will get bored with it. It's a network all about liberalism or even radicalism - let it be only that. The problem is that second and third tier conservative talking heads are so desperate for face time that they'll agree to sit in what amounts to a dunk tank seat while Matthews, Schultz, et al throw balls at the target.
The thing is, liberals do not get shouted down on Fox - with the exception of O'Reilly who shouts down almost everybody.
Once I heard him
Submitted by rgallegos on Wed, 11/17/2010 - 1:21am.
Once I heard him say "imaginary line" I knew this would be just another open borders/pro-illegal immigrant commercial.
I wonder if Lawrence would say the same if someone wanted to cross the imaginary line that makes up his property line of his house?
When anyone say the border crossed them I like to tell them your ancestors should have been more vigilant at San Jacinto!