Ingraham: Path to citizenship for illegal immigrants would bring more viewers to nets and cables with "the more liberal viewpoint"
On The O'Reilly Factor, nationally syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham claimed the "supposed mainstream media" are "making the same bet that [Sen.] Ted Kennedy [D-MA] is making" by supporting a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Ingraham maintained that just as Kennedy supports granting a path to citizenship because it will "redound to the Democrats' benefit," presumably through votes, the media -- which she claimed "tilts to the left" -- support citizenship because it will bring "new viewers, new listeners, new customers to the more liberal viewpoint" to which the media purportedly cater.
On the May 1 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, nationally syndicated radio host Laura Ingraham claimed the "supposed mainstream media" are "making the same bet that [Sen.] Ted Kennedy [D-MA] is making" by supporting a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Ingraham maintained that just as Kennedy supports granting a path to citizenship because it will "redound to the Democrats' benefit," presumably through votes, the media -- which she claimed "tilts to the left" -- support citizenship because it will bring "new viewers, new listeners, new customers to the more liberal viewpoint" to which the media purportedly cater. Ingraham included NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC among the "mainstream media" that "tilts to the left."
Ingraham's suggestion that Democrats support granting citizenship to illegal immigrants because it would "redound" to their "benefit" echoed comments by Fox News host Brit Hume, who asked on the March 16 edition of Fox News' Special Report, "Is it fair to say the Republicans want these people to stay here so they can work, and Democrats want them to stay here so they can vote?"
From the May 1 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Why do you think the media is so hell-bent on supporting the amnesty movement? Because, no matter what they say, that's what this is all about. And the bottom line is that there are between 12 and 14 million people here, shouldn't be here. And they want them all legalized along with all of their families, adding 25 to 30 new citizens in the next 10 years to this country. Why do you think the media is so OK with that?
INGRAHAM: Well, if you believe that the mainstream media, supposed mainstream media, tilts to the left, which I believe, then you believe that they're making the same bet that Ted Kennedy is making and [Sen.] Barbara Boxer [D-CA], etc., that these new unskilled aliens, illegal aliens becoming citizens will redound to the Democrats' benefit. If it redounds to the Democrats' benefit, it then redounds to the benefit of NBC, ABC, and CBS, throw in CNN and MSNBC. So they think these are, you know, new viewers, new listeners, new customers to the more liberal viewpoint, and I think that's what the bet is that they are making.
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
whether or not the mainstream media tilts left or right is an endless, boring debatable point, but Ingraham's main point is absolutely correct. the democrats want the future voters and the republicans want the cheap labor, generally speaking. this is hardly breaking news, much less conservative misinformation.
Interesting to note also that MMFA offered no rebuttal to Ingrahams comments.
The point is that Ingraham is getting her information from the same place as Rush - the bureau of her own ass. What evidence, other than her own assertion, supports one single thing she said? Do YOU know any illegal immigrants? I'll bet ol' Laura just asked her gardener, "do you plan on watching liberal TV or voting Democrat??" in English he answered "Si! Si! Senora!" while nodding - he probably thought she was asking him to weed the flower beds. I'm sure that ol' whitebread Laura's really connected with the immigrant population.
It's not difficult to look at voting trends of minority groups and make an educated guess about which way they will vote.
well said bruce. and ingraham is as much in tuned with immigrants as is kennedy and boxer and the elite pandering crowd they associate with. give me a break. to act as though kennedy is more in touch with the average working person is outlandish.
but you can bet that they care one hell of a lot more for the plight of those people. Yep, all those "secular humanist liberals" that the religious righties decry do a hell of a lot more for the common man than your wonderful "christian republicans". Sorry, the GOP has always been the party of "I've got mine, screw you", and continue to be. They certainly weren't the party of civil rights, that's for certain - or education, or welfare, or health care for everyone. But worse?? Ol' President Chimp is even LESS in touch with your average working man. I'm just SOOOOOO sure he's concerned about high gas prices. Yeah, that's right, he's "watching" them - watching them empty our pockets of what little money we have left.
Some one on C-Span made this statement about AAs and the Democratic Party: They ain't perfect, they might not even like me but at least they weren't trying to kill me and they made the people that were stop. Seriously though, the Democrats party is a consortium of little guys. We have very little money all we have is the POWER of our pooled votes. In the past few years the Republicans through ugly manipulation was successful at draining some of that pool for a while, but I think that's going to change.
BTW, I respectfully disagree with my friend that always decries Democratic pandering to minority voters. Addressing the concerns of members of your constituency isn't pandering. But if you want to call it that let me say this - better to be pandered to then ignored or worse maligned.
you two are so funny. Kennedy and McCain both made the proposal. And for voting trends: which conservative suggested that mexicans are actually republicans with their working ethics etc.
And in which states will it have the most influence (not to say that most people do not use their vote).
glad to provide some entertainment. LOL
I actually refered to right on and that other dude.
she
thought you were replying to my comment. But I still like to be entertaining - beats the hell out of boring, right?
Actually the hispanic demographic while they do tend to vote democratic also tend to be conservative on social issues. Not exactly a safe demographic for liberals. Personally I dont care about that one way or another but you can bet your bottom dollar the democratic bigwigs KNOW this.
If your going to say Boxer and Kennedy are high class elites and are out of touch with the average worker, fine. However, to suggest or hint that Ted Baxter and Laura Ingraham are in touch with the average working person is as equally absurd.
Cubans vote overwhelmingly Republican. It is pure generalization to say that every group would be liberally inclined.
According to CNN.com Election 2004, 44% of Hispanics voted for Bush.
In 2000, 35% voted for Bush.
In 1996, Bob Dole received 21% of the Hispanic vote.
Mind commenting on those trends? Does legalizing 11 million illegal immigrants help the Democrats or the Republicans?
Do you really think that is a reasonable argument for immigration reform? That resulting immigrants will vote in a way she doesnt like? I mean, I get that many republicans put selfish self interest above any other consideration but this argument takes that concept into the stratosphere. Personally I am not a democrat and couldnt care less how they vote. My take on the issue is about balancing empathy for the plight of poor workers who have been in this country for a long time contributing and both the interests a country has controlling immigration and the effects uncontrolled immigration have on wages for poor working people. None of which effects me directly.
Hey Solon, I agree with you on this. I think Laura is correct that the Hispanics will be majority left, but I don't think the news people are arguing this immigration policy based on that fact. It's just coincidence I believe. Thanks for the heads up on that.
I'll keep that in mind every time I see a leftover "Viva Bush!" bumper sticker from '04 that the disillusioned were unable to scrape off of their vehicles.
Does she drag any Republican senators through the mud over their labor exploitation conspiracy? I didn't see the broadcast, so I don't know. She definitely siezed the opportunity to drag Kennedy and Boxer through the mud with a baseless assertion about hoping to acquire the immigrant vote. Therefore, the 'misinformation' is that O'Reilly, and Faux News in general, is 'fair and balanced.'
It's a smear to say that Democrats' motivation is more votes for them. That's ludicrous. It's just another in a long line of false equivelency arguments put forward by the right. In this case it's the "both sides are up to no good" excuse.
Face it. It's much easier to be a Republican in this country. You can pander to fear and hold out your hand to receive cash from the deep pockets of the coporate interests you protect. It takes more courage to be a Democrat; to champion people who don't have a whole lot of money or status.
Courage is doing the right thing even though it's the hard thing. The cons have taken the low road, time and time again.
Correction: money, status, or RIGHTS.
and just exactly what rights should illegal immigrants be afforded in this country?
Human rights.
That's an easy one. Got any other softballs?
To replace Tweety - he was pretending you were a liberal guest.
dodged the 'liberal media' question. Although you say she is right -according to you- on the voting, she specifically states that the media are also involved in keeping illegal mexicans here because they provide "new viewers, new listeners, new customers to the more liberal viewpoint". What do you think of that point?
if you are asking me, i dodged nothing. i don't get in an argument about the liberal or conservative media because it is tiresome, overblown and a waste of time. entrenched partisans whine about it all the time, use it to bolster their viewpoint or whatever. i said it's endless and boring, so who cares? i addressed her assertion that the democrats wanted the voters, which i agreed with.
what about her second statement, because whe uses the same argument for the media.
i think i answered it by saying i don't necessarily agree with her because i am not so convinced of media bias in either direction. i believe the media is driven by ratings, and scooping stories and making their own headlines, rather than some ideology.
I will accept that, but as I mentioned earlier: Kennedy and McCain both made the proposal. And for voting trends: which conservative suggested that mexicans are actually republicans with their working ethics etc.
And in which states will it have the most influence (not to say that most people do not use their vote).
I think you agreed with Brit Hume not with Laura who stops at the democrats-voting link.
Do you seriously believe that Republicans don't want the Hispanic vote? They've courted that constituency much more stringently than they have the AA vote. Certainly both parties would like the vote, but I believe the attraction to the Democratic Party will occur through natural selection based on the Democrat’s record of civil rights and social justice advocacy. Again the wing nut portion of the Republican party were heavy handed in their approach to the problem and the debate has been down right ugly at times and they probably have sunk the RNC’s Hispanic out reach program.
This just in from the pesky wayback machine.
By Joe Cantlupe COPLEY NEWS SERVICE January 13, 2004
WASHINGTON – President Bush's proposal to grant temporary legal status to millions of illegal immigrants has many U.S. Border Patrol agents grumbling and bracing for a possible surge in illegal immigration.
"Everybody thinks it's a slap in the face," said T.J. Bonner, a San Diego-based agent and head of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents 10,000 agents.
Democrats want immigrants made citizens to bolster the already "liberal media?"
Sounds more like righty radio paranoia to me.
Well gee whiz, Laura, I can't imagine why immigrants would gravitate towards the MSM rather than, say, FOX News or your talk show. I don't understand why they wouldn't sympathize with constant whining about how tough white folks have it in America.
Is Lour Dobbs part of the Liberal media too?
Conservatives who are for amnesty are only for it because almost all Mexicans are catholics and they want more catholics in this country to bolster their anti-choice cause.
conservatives are for making illegal immigration a felony because it costs $400 per immigrant minimum to do it the right way.
I promise you they wouldn't give a rat's behind if they could filch the pockets of every immigrant entering the country.
---"new customers to the more liberal viewpoint"---
There must be a cynical, sly, cold-hearted reason behind any decision made by a Democrat, because hey!--that's the way right-wingers like Ingraham and her followers & apologists think. 'What can he/she/they do for ME?' is how they process information, and how they figure everyone else does.
Can't be that granting a path to citizenship for these immigrants is out of simple human concern for their welfare and the principals of our country. Nope, nope. These right-wingers are incapable of comprehending that anyone could have that sort of motive.
I'm stil attracted to this creature, I feel so ashamed of myself, yet? She can be neo-con dirty to me, and I like it!!! Baby, Baby, Baaaaaabyy! ..
Ok, that being said; PARANOIA WILL DESTROYA!!!!
Their making the noises of the coward who knows trouble is coming.
They see the battle ahead, and they know their going to loose.
They know their disgrace will soon be for all to see, and their squirming for any ledge to hold onto.
Let me help, Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
making illegals citizens is going to add another 40 to 50 million people to this country is just a few years. where are the environmentalists on this issue? hiding under the bed because they might get called a racist?
Why have they either been silent about, or criticized Colbert's performance in the White House gathering, while incessantly and annoyingly repeating that "Bush was funny"? An awareness of Colbert's accurate and funny remarks would benefit the left, yet the media is mum about it.
Ummm...I'm just wondering how credible can your show be when you use Laura Ingraham as a source? Was no one else (of any remote credibility) available that day? How absurd!
this is baseless, but to be fair, I think Bush is well aware that a large section of his constituency is Hispanic. He's attempting the proven Clinton triangulation and doing a poor job of it. Hence support amnesty.. but no you can't change the anthem, because having it sung in Spanish will mean it will "automatically" replace the english version in the public sphere.