On April 19, Fox News' supposedly "straight news" programs used a White House meeting on immigration reform to fearmonger about immigration, bash President Obama, and refer to undocumented immigrants as "illegals."
The Knob Creek Gun Range in West Point, Kentucky advertises its World Famous, twice-a-year Machine Gun Shoot as "Family Friendly" entertainment. The slogan: "Nothing brings families together like blowing stuff apart...safely."
I won't deny the red-blooded-American joy of firing automatic weapons at exploding targets.
Still I have to ask: What's up with the little kids in Nazi shirts?
I was on site at the Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot fewer than 20 minutes last Saturday before I passed a shaved-head lad with with a Totenkopf death head on his chest. (The Totenkopf was the symbol of the Nazi SS division that ran death camps like Auschwitz during the Holocaust.)
The shirt looked brand new. I took that to mean the kid or whoever gave it to him bought it from one of the dozen or so permitted vendors who openly sold white supremacist merchandise. This included a wide selection of t-shirts and flags bearing symbols popular with racist skinheads and neo-Nazis. (And no, I'm not counting Confederate battle flags.) Also for sale were the race war fantasy novels Hunter and The Turner Diaries by William Pierce, founder of the National Alliance, a notorious hate group. A Friends of the NRA fundraising booth was located within sight of a stall of swastika flags.
Video- Guns and neo-Nazi merchandise
This week, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is holding a rally hosting a various extreme anti-immigrant radio hosts. Yet FAIR promotes themselves as a mainstream organization, touting their ability to "shed light on this complex subject on their website." Below the jump are some of the extreme, violent, offensive and false comments that FAIR's rally guests have made.
Fox & Friends hosted Dan Stein, head of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), to fearmonger both about "anchor babies" and so-called "birth tourism." But the "anchor baby" concept is a myth, pushed by anti-immigrant groups like FAIR, which is considered a "hate group," and the number of children born to women visiting the United States is "fairly miniscule."
This morning on Fox & Friends, Steve Doocy introduced us to a Rollins College freshman who, in Doocy's retelling, is being harshly and unduly criticized for "simply giving her opinion" in an op-ed (registration required) for her college newspaper. That opinion, its merit, and the coherence of its expression can all be gleaned from the op-ed's title: "Illegal Babies Should Be Illegal Citizens." What the hell is an "illegal citizen," you ask? Your guess is as good as mine.
I'm not here to bash on a college op-ed, but a brief summary is required: birthright citizenship is bad, "pregnant foreigner[s]" are at this moment "waltz[ing] right over our borders" to have "anchor babies," and the 14th Amendment should be changed so that America will attract "only the best and the brightest to its golden shores." Apparently, and unsurprisingly, she took some heat for her poorly articulated nativism and that provided the hook for Doocy, who offered up this confused student as yet another victim of liberal academia, or something.
Imagine that. Someone was criticized for offering a controversial opinion. Quelle horreur.
The infuriating aspect of this is the assumption that "anchor babies" actually exist and are a valid topic for debate. They're a myth. The Pew Hispanic Center found that the overwhelming majority of undocumented immigrants who became parents between 2009 and 2010 had already been in the country for years. People enter the country illegally looking for work, not to have children.
But Fox News' reality, of course, is a very different place where the idea of pregnant women dancing freely across the border to give birth isn't just true, it's beyond criticism.
Following the release of a dubious report on "birth tourism" by the Center For Immigration Studies, Andrew Breitbart's website Big Peace highlighted the study's conclusions that hundreds of thousands of women visiting the United States give birth to babies here each year and that some of them are likely "terror babies" who will eventually use their U.S. citizenship to attack the United States in 20 to 30 years.
Media Matters' Will Bunch previously reported on the shortage of media attention paid to Shawna Forde, the leader of an armed movement against undocumented immigrants, who murdered a 9 year-old girl and her father as part of an attempt to finance her anti-immigrant group. Forde was recently sentenced to death. To their credit, Fox News Latino believed this was front page news, promoting a story by Spanish newswire EFE:
Fox News, once again demonstrating the difference between Fox News and Fox News Latino was entirely silent. Instead, they helped perpetuate the myth of immigrant violence by focusing on stories where immigrants were the ones committing the crimes. From FoxNews.com's immigration section:
During a discussion about immigration this morning on Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade used the term "anchor babies" to describe children of undocumented immigrants. However, unlike other instances on Fox when the term has been used, today the network used it as a legitimate term, as though this was the accepted phrase to use when discussing immigration, blatantly disregarding the fact that the term "anchor babies" has been called "derogatory, even racist."
Fox News promoted Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's claim that the federal government has failed to "do its job" on border security without mentioning that border security efforts have increased measurably under President Obama: Deportations, drug seizures, and the number of Border Patrol agents have all increased.
Among the many derogatory labels that have been deployed by anti-immigrant activists to shape the public debate over immigration, few are as ugly or as potent as the term "anchor baby." Used to describe a child of undocumented immigrants born in the United States and thus entitled to American citizenship, it's a nasty turn of phrase that simultaneously dehumanizes a child and impugns the integrity of the parents, who are presumed to have jumped the border just before birth so that they might benefit from their baby's U.S. citizenship. For demagogues, "anchor babies" are a very serious issue -- one California anti-immigration activist told the Los Angeles Times in 2009: "It's invasion by birth canal."
It's long been understood, however, that the "anchor baby" phenomenon was a myth. Indeed, a child born to non-citizen parents can not sponsor them for citizenship until he or she turns 21, and even then there are legal hurdles aplenty. But the term has persisted in the media as state legislatures and even some congressional Republicans have pushed "anchor baby" legislation aimed at denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, citing dubious legal interpretations of the 14th Amendment. Newly released data, however, confirms what we already suspected was the truth: "anchor babies" are a myth.
A Pew Hispanic Center report released yesterday found that of all the undocumented immigrants who became parents between March 2009 and March 2010, 91 percent arrived in the U.S. before 2007. Put simply, those immigrants came here for reasons other than quickie-citizenship for their offspring. As The American Prospect's Adam Serwer wrote: "The data suggests a really shocking conclusion: People come to the U.S. to get jobs, not to have babies."
That's not going to stop the activists who popularized the term from using it -- they have their agendas, after all -- and it's not likely to disappear from Fox News, where just last month Bill O'Reilly decried the "misuse" of the Constitution by "foreigners" who "sneak across our borders to give birth." [The O'Reilly Factor, 1/6/11] But the new data should impel the more responsible corners of the press to cease the blithe repetitions of the term and allowing demagogues to tip the rhetorical debate in their favor.
From the January 31 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
Loading the player reg...
From the January 18 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends
Loading the player reg...
Fox News lauded Republicans' ceremonial reading of the U.S. Constitution on the House floor. However, Fox News figures have boosted right-wing efforts to change birthright citizenship as provided by the 14th Amendment in order to exclude the children of illegal immigrants.
From the January 6 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
Loading the player reg...
This afternoon on Fox News' America Live, host Megyn Kelly spoke with Peter Johnson Jr. about the current legal challenges to birthright citizenship, as established by the 14th Amendment, and gave a wildly dishonest reading of the law and precedent to suggest that conferring citizenship based on birthplace is unconstitutional.
The segment is clipped below.
The 14th Amendment states:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Johnson said that the "constitutional argument today that's being made is that the folks who are illegal immigrants, undocumented aliens, are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as defined in the 14th Amendment." Kelly said there's a "shocking dearth of Supreme Court precedent on this. ... There's not a lot of cases out there that take up the issue about what the 14th Amendment was meant to speak to." They briefly discussed the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which held that a child born in the U.S. to parents who were "subjects of the Emperor of China" was, in fact, a U.S. citizen. Johnson, however, dismissed that ruling as "political," as opposed to "constitutional," and a "weak" precedent.