Anyone else have that guy at work who tells incoherent stories in which he makes self-promoting claims rife with blatant factual errors, only no one calls him out on it because that would just make things even more awkward? Just me? Anyway, CNN’s story on Arizona and their immigration law is kind of like that guy:
(CNN) — The biggest change in Arizona since the state adopted a tough immigration enforcement policy two years ago has been a more tolerant climate for immigrants, representatives from several groups said Monday.
I didn’t realize there were climate change provisions in the bill. Must have been one of those comprehensive solutions. Next we hear from one of the title’s ambiguous “several groups”:
“There has been a change in Arizona, without a doubt,” said Clarissa Martinez, director of immigration for the National Council of La Raza, which led a coalition of civil rights groups in a tourism boycott of the state after SB 1070 became law in the spring of 2010.
Translation: An activist member of the racialist group La Raza, which in English means “The Race”, self-servingly claimed the boycott she helped organize was a success. In a similar story, a Wal-Mart greeter requested a substantial raise, citing the “spending crazy aura” engendered by her smile.
There were dire warnings by critics when the law took effect in July 2010 that it would keep businesses and people from moving to the state and that it would drive families away. There is no good measure of how many Hispanic families, fearing persecution by law enforcement, moved from Arizona.
Translation: The usual culprits acted like crazy people when Arizona decided to uphold the rule of law as it pertains to immigration. We can’t (or perhaps don’t want to?) confirm or deny whether these claims were every bit as nuts as they usually turn out to be (see: Global Warming, Welfare Reform Act of 1996), so we’ll spend the rest of this article just taking their word for it. In other news, a doomsday preacher predicted the world would end yesterday, and CNN can’t say for certain if he was correct, and thus we’re now living in an alternate reality.
Last November, voters recalled SB 1070’s architect, Russell Pearce, from his state senate post, replacing him in November with a Republican who opposed the immigration crackdown.
That ‘Republican who opposed the immigration crackdown’ happens to be a conservative Republican who called the immigration law “a good start”, but let’s not let that get in the way of the Democrat-Media Complex narrative.
“Arizonans are coming together to undo the tarnished image of their state that was inflicted on them by their governor and Sen. Pearce,” Martinez said.
Or they threw Pearce out because he was corrupt, accepting but not disclosing, and eventually lying about, $40K in goods from Fiesta Bowl officials.
The shift against the immigration measures came “because people realize they don’t want to be in a state that’s suppose to be a vacation spot or a place to retire, but has an international reputation of being inhospitable and a place of intolerance,” Fitz said.
What shift? SB1070 is still overwhelmingly supported by the state’s residents, who are thankfully immune to progressive think tankers condescending suggestions to the contrary (although CNN misleadingly refers to Fitz’s Center for American Progress as simply “a Washington-based public policy think tank”) .
The only shift is by CNN, away from reporting facts or polls, and towards letting liberal activist groups report the news. Their purpose is to give the impression that all good, kind, right-thinking people agree that the Arizona immigration law is an outrage, so they can pat themselves on the back for falling into that group, while guilting others into joining them. It’s what Thomas Sowell famously described as “self-congratulation as a basis for social policy”.
But can you blame them? After all, who needs sovereignty when there are backhanded compliments from “The Race” to be had.