Arizona law

The Lady doth protest Arizona's immigration law - Lady Gaga, that is.

Gaga went political about immigration reform at a sold-out Arizona concert on July 31, telling cheering fans that she found the situation in Arizona "disgusting" and a "state of emergency."

"We have to actively protest," Gaga said. "And the nature of the Monster Ball [concert tour] is to actively protest prejudice and injustice and the bulls*** that is put on our society."

Although Gaga promised to "peaceably protest" immigration in Arizona, she went on to tell fans that she "will yell and I will scream louder," according to the New York Daily News. Gaga told her adoring fans that she staunchly supports immigration because "if it wasn't for all of you immigrants, this country wouldn't have sh**."

(Video contains profanity.) 

UPDATE, 6:20 p.m. ET: AP now has a 5:28 p.m. item on the bounty. It's enough to make you wonder if the item below shamed the wire service into covering it. 

(original post) 

A look at the Associated Press's raw national feed (saved and stored here at about 1:30 p.m. ET for future reference) informs us that the wire service considers the following items worthy of at least some countrywide attention:

• We're No. 1! UGA tops party schools ranking
• Lindsay Lohan released from jail, goes to rehab
• (Football Player Albert) Haynesworth again doesn't pass conditioning test
• Vuvuzelas silenced for basketball worlds

The fact that the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona has had a $1 million bounty placed on his head by a Mexican drug cartel, an offer that is being treated as a credible threat? Sorry, that doesn't make the cut. An AP search on Sheriff Joe Arpaio's last name confirms it:

Pinal County (Ariz.) Sheriff Paul Babeu is hopping mad at the federal government.

Babeu told CNSNews.com that rather than help law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel.

"What's very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU," Babeu said.

"You're talking about brainwashing, when by a 10-to-1 margin, they [the broadcast media] attack Arizona," Media Research Center (MRC) founder Brent Bozell told Sean Hannity on the "Media Mash" segment on the July 30 "Hannity" program.

The NewsBusters publisher was commenting on an MRC study that found in a 3-month survey [April 23 - July 25] of the three broacast networks, that of 120 stories Arizona immigration law stories aired, 77 were negative compared to just 8 positive and 35 neutral. Additionally, there was a roughly 2-to-1 disparity [ 216 to 107] when it come to anti- vs. pro-SB1070 comments on those news stories.

"Here's the reality of the situation: the American people by 10-to-1 want border security. So the media are doing the exact opposite of what the American people want," Bozell concluded.

For the full segment's MP3 audio, click here. To watch the segment, click here to download the WMV video file or click the play button in the embed above.

Harry Smith on Sunday actually asked an anti-Arizona SB-1070 advocate whether or not the United States government should stem the flow of illegal immigrants into America.

Subbing for Bob Schieffer on CBS's "Face the Nation," Smith invited on Thomas Saenz, the head of the Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund, a pro-illegal immigrant group.

Early in the segment, Smith asked his guest, "Do you feel like the federal government is doing enough to stem the flow of illegal immigrants and -- or should it?"

Moments later, Smith asked Saenz if he felt Arizona's new immigration law was "anti-Hispanic" (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):

Sarah Palin said on Sunday that when it comes to securing America's borders, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer "has the cojones that our president does not have to look out for all Americans."

Speaking to Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday," Palin addressed this week's decision by a federal judge to block much of the anti-illegal immigration law passed by Arizona earlier this year.

"Well, this is a temporary suspension of some of the key elements in the law that Jan Brewer pushed hard for Arizonans and for the rest of the country to have the result of us being more secure," said Palin. 

That's when she really took aim at the White House (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

You know the expression "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight?"

Well that's exactly what happened when Columbia University professor Marc Lamont Hill entered the ring against conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham on "Larry King Live" Thursday night.

The subjects up for debate included the Obamas, Arizona's illegal immigration law, and racism.

To put it mildly, when the final bell had rung, there wasn't much left of Hill (videos and transcripts follow with limited commentary for what will be very obvious reasons): 

CNN's Rick Sanchez on Thursday actually asked an Arizona state Congressman, "What is your beef with illegal immigration?"

Imagine that, a so-called journalist asking an elected official what his beef is with people breaking the law.

Honestly, I had to watch this segment four times to convince myself that Sanchez said something this absurd.

On the other hand, those familiar with Sanchez's work will view his interview with Arizona state Rep. Rick Murphy (R) par for the course (video follows with transcript and commentary):

On Wednesday night's "Anderson Cooper 360," CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin claimed that the federal judge in the Arizona immigration case doesn't possess "a strong political profile one way or another," which is a sign the decision is well-supported by the law.

Cooper asked Toobin if Judge Bolton, who decided the case, was a liberal, noting that she was appointed to the post by President Clinton."She's a Clinton appointee, but she was recommended by Jon Kyl," Toobin responded, "who is a very conservative senator from Arizona."

"She's clearly not a strong partisan, but we are a long way from the last word on the constitutionality of this law," Toobin added. "This is a hard case. You are going to see other judges come out other ways on this."

Toobin's points were also echoed by liberal blogs such as Media Matters and ThinkProgress, a liberal blog.

Robert Gibbs on Friday appeared on all three network morning shows, as well as Fox News, MSNBC and CNN, but only FNC quizzed the White House press secretary about whether the White House would try and force immigration reform without Congress.

Co-host Steve Doocy challenged, "There are some memos circulating...up on Capitol Hill, and probably at the White House as well, about how the administration is exploring the way to get around Congress by using discretionary authority to allow people who are in the country illegally to stay in the country."

When Gibbs dodged the question, Doocy pressed the subject: "Robert, if you haven't seen the memo, do you know whether or nor there is that talk? To use discretionary authority on the part of the administration to get around Congress to allow people who are in the country now illegally to stay?" All of the other cable and network morning shows ignored the topic.

“Anger in the streets and we’re there for the protests,” ABC anchor Diane Sawyer teased in making reaction from a few opposed to Arizona’s immigration enforcement efforts her top story on Thursday night. She led: “Emboldened by a judge's rebuke of that law yesterday, hundreds of opponents of the crackdown took to the streets today. But the state's unyielding Governor stood by the law.” ABC’s Barbara Pinto touted over video which included a protester waving a Che Guevara flag:

Demonstrations started at dawn – hundreds of protesters, dozens of arrests, tempers flaring. Tensions are running high here outside this jail, where protesters have gathered and it's turned into a standoff with sheriff's deputies who are trying to push their way out of the building. Demonstrations were loud, disruptive, but mostly peaceful.

After a clip of a woman complaining “Joe Arpaio has picked the easy targets, the day laborers. Let's go after the real criminals and stop wasting our money,” Pinto fretted: “This afternoon, Sheriff Arpaio launched one of his controversial crime raids, targeting illegal immigrants.” She concluded with a warning: “Tonight's rally intended to send a clear signal to lawmakers and to Governor Brewer from those who think even a partial law is too much.”

On Thursday's Newsroom, CNN's Tony Harris played hardball with Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, the author of the SB1070 anti-illegal immigration law in the state, while not asking one tough question with his other guest, pro-illegal immigration activist Isabel Garcia. Surprisingly, Harris did finally explicitly identify the pro-open borders organization that Garcia leads [audio clips available here].

The CNN anchor brought on Pearce and Garcia to discuss a federal district justice's Wednesday injunction against key provisions in the Arizona law. He identified the state senator as the "lawmaker who co-sponsored the immigration bill," and his other guest's role as "co-chair of the Tucson-based Coalition for Human Rights." This contrasts with their earlier joint appearance with Harris on July 7, where the anchor merely identified Garcia as the "deputy public defender in Pima County, Arizona." He still neglected to mention this organization's pro-illegal immigration stance (not to leave out their website, which features a logo incorporating the southwestern states into Mexico).

The Arizona immigration law on Thursday was the repeated subject of snide and belittling remarks by MSNBC’s “Morning Joe" panel. So, naturally, while discussing Wednesday's federal court ruling, New York Time's columnist Gail Collins continued the narrative.

Collins championed the federal government and sneered "You do not want state legislatures ruling these things," because basically, "They're horrible. They're all gerrymandered. They never get thrown out of office. They are all nuts!"

Good Morning America's Bill Weir on Thursday touted a court ruling that removed key portions of Arizona's immigration law. He announced the judge's decision as one spanning "from rage to relief." He derided the possible implementation of the legislation as "the day when reasonable suspicion would take on a whole new meaning."

Weir, who will soon take over as the new co-host of Nightline, chided Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. He asserted that she "seems ready to take an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. Goading President Obama and Congress all the while."

The ABC journalist's example of Brewer's goading? This comment: "They need to step up, the feds do, and do the job that they have the responsibility to do."

It's been more than three months since Governor Jan Brewer (R-Ariz.) signed SB-1070 into law, but Larry King continues to misrepresent both the spirit and letter of the popular anti-illegal immigration measure. On his eponymous program yesterday, the CNN host asked a guest if the law codifies racial profiling and empowers police officers to arbitrarily question and detain those suspected of being in the country illegally.

"One of the things in this law that's puzzling that [Judge Susan Bolton] pointed out is – and a police officer was on a recent show discussing it – you can just stop a person on the street and just question who they are based on the way they look or their appearance?" asked King, directing his question at Jim Gilchrist, founder of Minuteman Project, a conservative group that supports the Arizona law.

Gilchrist attempted to correct King's faulty assumptions about the law, but the CNN veteran was recalcitrant: "So why were so many cops upset with this, saying it would put them in a difficult position?"

In nine short paragraphs, Los Angeles Times staffer Nicholas Riccardi offered readers a slanted look at how "Immigration demonstrations kick[ed] off in Arizona" yesterday, when the state's new anti-illegal immigration law went into effect [except for the portions ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge].

Reporting from Phoenix, Riccardi jumped straight away into loaded language (emphasis mine):

Opponents of Arizona's hard-line stance on illegal immigration launched a small religious procession from the state Capitol before dawn Thursday, the first of a series of demonstrations for the day the nation's strictest immigration law was due to take effect.

So who organized the religious procession? Is it purely a protest by otherwise apolitical religious folks, or were secular political interest groups involved? Riccardi didn't elaborate.

On Thursday's Early Show, correspondent John Blackstone reported on a federal judge blocking several provisions in Arizona's new immigration law: "The judge's ruling seemed to answer the prayers of many in Arizona's immigrant communities." Footage of two women crying and praying at a protest against the law followed his declaration.

Blackstone began his report by noting that protestors "are already beginning to gather for more protests today against Arizona's new law. They know that even with the court ruling yesterday...there will be an appeal, that their battle is not over." During the segment, the headline on screen read: "Border Battle; Judge Blocks Part of Controversial Immigration Law."

Continuing to highlight opposition to the law, Blackstone focused one woman: "Waitress Yessica Perez is a U.S. citizen, but she feared the law would make her a target for police." He then inaccurately claimed that the law "would have required police to check the immigration status of virtually anyone they suspected of being here illegally." Blackstone never explained that police could only question someone's status after stopping them for a legal violation. Meanwhile, a clip was played of Perez fretting: "I heard of people that they didn't want to go out, just grocery shopping. They were worried they were going to be pulled over just because – because of this law."

In the past couple of weeks, comedian George Lopez has made two noteworthy jokes during the monologue of his Lopez Tonight show on TBS with the premise that conservatives are racist. On Wednesday’s show, as he brought up President Obama’s interview recorded earlier in the day on ABC’s The View, Lopez took a swipe at right-leaning co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck as he cracked that she had "instinctively grabbed her purse and hit the imaginary door locks on her couch" when she saw Obama coming.

And on the Monday, July 12, show, Lopez portrayed the people of Arizona as racist for supporting the state’s new immigration law, as he suggested that Arizona would welcome Mel Gibson-style racism. Lopez: "Let’s see. He don’t like people of color, he don’t like Mexicans, he don’t like minorities, where can he go? Orale, Arizona!"

After acting out Gibson’s part by declaring, "I hate blacks, I don’t like Mexicans," Lopez then pretended to be an Arizona resident welcoming Gibson into the state: "Right this way."

Chris Matthews on Wednesday said a federal judge's ruling that struck down much of Arizona's new immigration law would be a killer politically for the Democrats in November and a huge windfall for the Right. 

This surprisingly occurred in the same "Hardball" program that Matthews claimed deporting illegal immigrants would be the equivalent of the American government orchestrating a pogrom.

For whatever reason, in his final "Let Me Finish" segment, the perilously liberal host was seeing this judge's decision as being very bad for the Party he loves and shamelessly shills for on a daily basis under the guise of "journalist" (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

“In a matter of minutes, relief replaced dread, hope replaced fear,” ABC's Barbara Pinto trumpeted in framing a Wednesday night look, at reaction to a federal judge's ruling barring implementation of key provisions of Arizona's immigration enforcement laws, around those pleased by it.

NBC's Lee Cowan relayed how the ruling “certainly came as welcome news” for illegals, “but while some were relieved, others fear the crackdown may come anyway.” An unidentified woman despaired: “I'm worried for my family. I'm worried for my friends. I worry for my people.” Cowan then warned of danger posed by the majority: “And there are those who worry about a backlash from those angry the court undid what the people of Arizona largely approved.”

On ABC, a grocer exclaimed “it's a happy emotion” and “there's a hope,” before Pinto explained: “Rosario Peralta, who is here legally, watched customers at her family's grocery store disappear, frightened families moving out of state. This afternoon, some of them came back.”

Pinto moved on to “undocumented immigrant” Erika Andiola who “crossed the border with her mom, sister and brothers illegally when she was 11 years old, running from domestic abuse.” Andiola celebrated: “Yesterday, I went to bed really depressed, but, this morning, like everything just came back. Like, the hope, the faith, knowing that all these prayers are really, you know, working.”

Pogrom: etymology--Yiddish, from Russian, literally, devastation. "An organized massacre of helpless people; specifically, such a massacre of Jews." -- Merriam-Webster

Chris Matthews has pulled off the rare unassisted triple-play of inanity.  On this evening's Hardball, he:

1. argued that enforcing the Arizona immigration law would put police officers in danger because illegals caught in a stop would be under tremendous "moral pressure" to use violence to escape;
2. repeatedly abused a Republican guest.  For the sin of disagreeing with him on immigration law, Matthews variously slimed Arizona state Sen. Rick Murphy as a "B.S. artist," a "hopeless right-winger," and "not serious;" and
3. most egregiously, claimed that deporting illegal immigrants from the US would constitute a "pogrom."

The TV networks have aggressively demonstrated their dislike of Arizona’s state law “cracking down on illegal immigrants,” a law that “pits neighbor against neighbor.” An MRC review of morning and evening news programs on ABC, CBS, and NBC from April 23 to July 25 found the networks have aired 120 stories with an almost ten-to-one tilt against the Arizona law (77 negative, 35 neutral, 8 positive).

The soundbite count was also tilted over the last three months -- 216 to 107, or an almost exact two-to-one disparity. Network anchors and reporters sided against defenders of border control and championed sympathetic illegal aliens and their (usually American-born) children. In 120 stories, they never described “immigrants rights activists” as liberals or on the left.

Between them, the three networks described the Arizona law as “controversial” on 27 occasions, despite its popularity in opinion polls. The Obama administration’s decision to sue file a lawsuit against Arizona to crush the law was never described as “controversial.”

ABC on Wednesday continued to attack Arizona's tough new immigration law. Good Morning America devoted three segments to the subject, even misstating what the legislation does.

News anchor Juju Chang incorrectly asserted, "The law would allow police to question anyone suspected of being in the country illegally."

In fact, the law would allow police to check immigration status only if an individual has already been stopped for a legitimate police reason. An onscreen graphic derided, "Target: Immigrants: Arizona Law Set to Take Effect." Notice that, according to ABC, Arizona is simply focusing on immigrants, not illegal immigrants.

Less than two days before Arizona's immigration enforcement law is scheduled to go into effect, ABC delivered another installment in the national media's efforts to discredit it and paint the law as doing more harm than good as anchor Diane Sawyer warned that “undocumented immigrants – many working in this country for decades – are fleeing the state, or hiding in fear.” [Audio available here]

With the on-screen heading “PREPARING FOR WORST” over video of an abandoned house, reporter Bill Weir intoned: “There is a fear-driven exodus going on in Arizona tonight. More vacant apartments, more empty shops, more kids disappearing from school.”

Weir explained that “Latino activists are urging their community to check their taillights, not travel in big groups and even remove the Catholic rosary beads from their rear view mirrors” while “law student Daniel Rodriguez, undocumented since his mother brought him at age six, tells me of all the parents giving power of attorney to neighbors in case they're deported without their American-born children.”

ABC's "World News" on Sunday caught up to CBS and NBC in fretting about the potential problems caused by illegal immigrants who may be leaving Arizona before the state's new law takes effect on Thursday. Correspondent Barbara Pinto devoted her entire piece to lamenting the possible damage to small businesses whose customers are presumably now leaving the state, but offered less than a sentence to the idea that illegal immigrants are already an expensive burden on state social services.

"The loud and bitter battle over Arizona's immigration law has reached fever-pitch," claimed Pinto. "But Rosario Peralta worries about the quiet exodus – immigrant families already leaving the state in droves. In the past few months, she's seen business and customers at her family grocery store disappear."

"This is the Left's absolute search-and-destroy character assassination campaign in full gear."

That's how NewsBusters publisher and Media Research Center President Brent Bozell characterized ABC's Dan Harris for his unbalanced coverage of the NAACP's anti-Tea Party resolution.

"For ABC to be giving aid and comfort to these lies is absolutely disgraceful," Bozell argued on the July 16 "Media Mash" segment on FNC's "Hannity."

Also discussed on Friday's appearance was how the media persistently insisted that ObamaCare would not allow for federal funding of abortion and that conservative critics were misleading the public by claiming as much. Now, months after Democrats strong-armed generally pro-life Democrats into scuttling their objections and voting for the health care overhaul, MRC's CNSNews.com is reporting on how abortion will be covered on health insurance in at in at least two states under ObamaCare provisions.

"The reality is Doug Johnson and the National Right to Life Committee nailed this one  right on the head.... It was true, it's perfectly true," Bozell noted of conservative warnings of taxpayer-subsidized abortion under ObamaCare.

For the full segment's MP3 audio, click here. Click here for a WMV video download or watch the embedded video above at right.

On Saturday's CBS Evening News, anchor Jeff Glor reported on an immigration protest in Boston: "...hundreds opposed to Arizona's controversial immigration law protested the presence of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer at a meeting there." One protestor held a sign that read: "Jan Brewer is a Bigot." Glor then turned to a report on a similar immigration law proposed in Pennsylvania.  

Correspondent Elaine Quijano explained how a CBS News poll showed 52% of Americans support the Arizona's immigration law and that "other states are preparing to follow Arizona's lead": "In Pennsylvania, bipartisan measures to compel construction companies to check worker's status are moving swiftly through the legislature." She then warned: "Republican state representative Daryl Metcalfe wants to go further, introducing a tough measure modeled after Arizona's law." She went on to declare: "Metcalfe's proposal is already facing fierce opposition."

Quijano described one source of that "fierce opposition," the Democratic mayor of Philadelphia: "Michael Nutter says the solution lies with the federal government, not the states." Nutter repeated Obama administration talking points on the issue: "We should not have a patchwork of immigration policies for every state in the United States of America. That's insane." Quijano added: "Nutter believes the law could create problems for law enforcement, making illegal immigrants afraid to report crimes to police."

One reason to hope that the Big 3 networks continue to muddle through their awful evening news ratings and somehow hang around is that there's an alternative out there that would be much worse.

If any of the networks ever considered outsourcing their nightly newscasts to the Associated Press, the likely result could be bad enough to make some long for the (relatively) good old days of Brian, Diane, and Katie.

An object example of the AP's pathetically one-sided, biased and completely not-transparent video reporting came last Tuesday when it covered the Department of Justice's lawsuit against Arizona's illegal immigration enforcement measure. The 1070 law tells police to verify citizenship status in "contact" situations (e.g., traffic stops and other routine matters) if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person or persons involved aren't here legally.

AP's go-to "expert" acts as if it's a given that the United States government has decided that being here illegally ("without documentation") isn't a crime. Seriously. During the 104-second report (first go here, then type "Arizona immigration" in the search bar near the bottom, and select "Fed. Suing to Block Ariz. Immigration Law"), AP reporter Brian Thomas interviewed no one who defended the law's constitutionality.

Here's the transcript:

Preconceived notions are dangerous things in journalism. They cause one to assume facts that aren't in evidence, leading to false or incomplete results.

A classic example has played out in the nearly three months since Arizona passed its "1070 law." Among other things, it mandates that law enforcement officials verify citizenship status in situations involving police contact if they have a reasonable suspicion that someone is not in the country legally.

It seems that virtually everyone covering the story has been assuming that Arizona's law is the first of its kind. Well, maybe as a "law" it is. But in Rhode Island, of all places, Boston Globe reporter Maria Sacchetti finally noticed on July 6 (HT Hot Air) that police have been doing what Arizona will start doing on July 29 since 2008 as a result of a gubernatorial executive order:

R.I. troopers embrace firm immigration role
In contrast to Mass., they report all who are present illegally

per·ni·cious \pər-'ni-shəs\ adj.: highly injurious or destructive : deadly

Sounds like a pretty harsh word to describe something, right? So whatever the word pernicious is describing must be pretty bad.

But leave it to The New York Times editorial board to throw this lingo around like it's no big deal. In a July 8 over-the-top editorial, the Times ripped the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law over its constitutionality.

"The Obama administration has not always been completely clear about its immigration agenda, but it was forthright Tuesday when it challenged the pernicious Arizona law that allows the police to question the immigration status of people they detain for local violations," the editorial said. "Only the federal government can set or enforce immigration policy, the government said in its lawsuit against the state, and ‘Arizona has crossed this constitutional line.'"

Video Below Fold