Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Editorial: "Status quo preferable to immigration bill"

I have to give the unnamed Courier editor some points today for applying himself a little more than usual in terms of original writing, timing the issue properly for voter effect and avoiding any mention of cowboys or dated pop culture. Hooray. But he loses points again for trying to make voters dumber.

His use of charged buzzwords in place of thinking is obvious. Less obvious is his employment of poll numbers to support his preconceptions. A more nuanced and reliable analysis is easily available from the Pew Center, directly contradicting several of the editor's core points. The overall point that most people say they don't like the bill is true as far as it goes, but not because they have a considered understanding of the issues or the bill.

Here the editor is fulfilling only his chosen role as part of the right-wing echo chamber, where he should be getting past his personal prejudices to serve the interests of the community. A personal, bylined column is fundamentally different from an unsigned editorial in this regard, and this piece should have come with a byline.


leftturnclyde said...

see what I mean about the lack of intrest in actually invetigating anything ?
just enough time spent on finding numbers that support what they already believe.
come on you courier reporters and editors perform your function! ask some hard questions,put feet to the fire,perform your
constitutional duty for the love of whatever deity you kneel to ...

leftturnclyde said...

yup I misspelled interest

Anonymous said...

Haven't we heard this 'new dependent class' and 'cheap labor' argument before? I mean what's new here? Why not just re-run the last one? At least John Wayne wasn't evoked, jared