Do you get your news online?

If so, do you ever comment after reading stories?




In this story in Truthout, author Roberto Cintli Rodriguez writes:




The unexpected new locations for hate crime scenes in the 21st century appear to be the comments sections of the nation's leading newspapers, where calls to violence have become routine and through which progressives have decided correcting the record is a waste of their time.




In his story, he provides examples that show "letters or comments sections appear to have become sanctuaries to virulent hate and, especially since the advent of the internet, a comfortable home to discourses of extremist hate and calls to violence, primarily of the extreme right-wing variety."


Now, this might be a partisan conclusion, but the point is that PEOPLE (whatever their politics) now use the Internet to talk trash and say horrible things, thinking they are anonymous (which they are not). As a result, many people simply do not read the letters or comments.




This is because of the "scripted messages" ... "talking points" ... "coded language, preposterous stereotypes and outright falsehoods" contained within.




You might not agree with the author that "right wing utilizes or engages the letters to the editor sections ... much more frequently, with much more volume and much more effectively than their liberal or progressive counterparts. It does this through the use of powerful metaphors and imagery, albeit false ones, which are effective because they are generally wrapped in the flag and/or the Bible. Demonization, fear and hate work. Repeated often enough, outright lies and distortions appear to be effective, especially when meanings of words are changed or misrepresented, and especially when they are not refuted. Soon, lies, distortions and misrepresentations become conventional wisdom. Conservative talk show hosts become credible sources, whereas facts are readily dismissed as liberal hearsay and heresy."






But you should agree with the argument that: "Audiences become susceptible in times of high stress, such as severe economic downturns, national crises, and especially in times of war. These are the times when people scapegoat the most politically powerless sectors and close ranks to fight a 'common enemy.'" This is what is happening right now with the immigration debate.

Obama is #1!

In case you did not know it, now you do.

Huge increases in deportations of people after they were arrested for breaking traffic or immigration laws or driving drunk helped the Obama administration set a record last year for the number of criminal immigrants forced to leave the country, documents show.

http://news.yahoo.com/drunken-driving-traffic-crime-deportations-way-072604914.html

Call me crazy ...

But this sounds like a crazy idea by some crazy people.

Texas Immigration Battle May Hit Home — Literally

 

Texas lawmaker's proposal would allow cops to drop off illegals at the doorsteps of members of Congress!!!!

 

Ariz. Senate OKs Tough Bills Targeting Illegals

 Report: Gangs Kidnapped More Than 11,000 Migrants in Mexico

Guess who is behind Arizona's immigration law?

In an example of fine investigative reporting (again illustrating the problem of private media and demonstrating the necessity of public media), NPR shows who is really behind the new immigration law in Arizona.

The lesson of this story is simple: If private companies wrote this law, because they thought it would benefit them personally (i.e., financially), then they clearly do not really want illegal immigration to go away. How do we know? Because they are in the business of making money; thus they would not write and push a law that would lead to monetary loss.

Translation: As long as there is illegal immigration, private prisons will make money. That is the clearest proof that the Arizona immigration law (written by the private prison industry) will not reduce illegal immigration into the country.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130833741