Save Our State

Save Our State (http://www.saveourstate.info/index.php)
-   Associates in Action (http://www.saveourstate.info/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Newspaper Article About the Rally Yesterday (http://www.saveourstate.info/showthread.php?t=857)

Borderwatch 01-17-2010 07:55 AM

Newspaper Article About the Rally Yesterday
 
http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/23428/

By Josh Premako
Signal Senior Writer
jpremako@the-signal.com
661-259-1234 x519
Posted: Jan. 16, 2010 8:33 p.m.
UPDATED Jan. 17, 2010 4:55 a.m.
2 Images
American flags and "Don't Tread on Me" banners flapped in the breeze as about 125 people gathered Saturday to oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Organized by the Santa Clarita Valley Independent Minutemen, it was the second annual anti-illegal immigration rally held outside the SCV Sheriff's Station at the corner of Magic Mountain Parkway and Valencia Boulevard.

A mostly white crowd listened and cheered as several speakers voiced disapproval for both President Barack Obama and former President George W. Bush and decried proposed federal legislation that would give amnesty to the estimated millions of illegal immigrants in America.

"If we would just deal with the illegals we wouldn't have a deficit in the state of California," said City Councilman Bob Kellar, his voice booming through a crackling public-address system. "This is an American problem. We've got to take back our country.

"If I sound like a radical, thank you. I consider that a compliment."

Fueling the recent furor is an immigration-reform bill championed by U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. The bill proposes a path to legalization for the country's illiegal immigrants.

Local Minuteman leader Roger Gitlin said while amnesty is not the answer, there are solutions.

"Nobody is calling for mass deportation," he said. "It would put the economy in a tailspin."

Gitlin proposed securing America's borders, and initiating an immigration census to determine people's status and whether or not they have a criminal record.

"Let's get rid of criminals and make sure they don't come back," he said.

For the law-abiding illegal immigrants who remain, he said, steps need to be put in place for them to pursue citizenship.

Gitlin used the example of a 30-something house painter he knows, who he said is a tax-paying illegal immigrant.

"(He's) not the problem," he said.

Canyon Country resident Homer Temple said race is not the issue, but the state of the nation.

"It's not a xenophobic thing," he said. "I firmly believe blue-collar Americans ... are pro-legal citizenship."

Mario Alvarez of Canyon Country said he came to America from Mexico City 49 years ago and has been a citizen since 1979.

He said the solution to the illegal immigration situation includes closing the borders and levying fines against immigrants here illegally and giving them a path toward citizenship.

"They should find their place in line," he said.

DerailAmnesty.com 01-17-2010 08:07 AM

Path to citizenship? I don't remember hearing those words spoken of favorably.

Did I miss something (seriously)? Was I that out to lunch? Did someone advocate for an amnesty during his or her speech?

Ayatollahgondola 01-17-2010 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borderwatch (Post 3815)
http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/23428/

By Josh Premako
Signal Senior Writer
jpremako@the-signal.com
661-259-1234 x519
Posted: Jan. 16, 2010 8:33 p.m.
UPDATED Jan. 17, 2010 4:55 a.m.
2 Images
American flags and "Don't Tread on Me" banners flapped in the breeze as about 125 people gathered Saturday to oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants.

"Nobody is calling for mass deportation," he said. "It would put the economy in a tailspin."

Gitlin proposed securing America's borders, and initiating an immigration census to determine people's status and whether or not they have a criminal record.

For the law-abiding illegal immigrants who remain, he said, steps need to be put in place for them to pursue citizenship.

Gitlin used the example of a 30-something house painter he knows, who he said is a tax-paying illegal immigrant.

"(He's) not the problem," he said.

Mario Alvarez of Canyon Country said he came to America from Mexico City 49 years ago and has been a citizen since 1979.

He said the solution to the illegal immigration situation includes closing the borders and levying fines against immigrants here illegally and giving them a path toward citizenship.

"They should find their place in line," he said.

I think this is not entirely representative of everyone's wishes. There are factions within the movement that are pushing for legalization of illegals under their guidelines, but from what I see, they would like to make us all believe that is the only way. I am divided as to how to convey otherwise without drawing their ire, but it looks like this newspaper chose that anyway, probably as a close second to their own agenda, which, by the way was also racial:
Quote:

A mostly white crowd listened and cheered as several speakers voiced disapproval for both President Barack Obama and former President George W. Bush
I think we'll just have to let everyone chime in on their own views, but my personal one is that I don't like choosing favorites among criminals, and especially so when the criteria is based upon willing taxpayers. This seems somewhat at odds with both TEA Party'er and immigration law enforcement supporters. If you oppose the "taxed enough already" agenda, how do you then justify importing new taxpayers who pledge their willingness to pay taxes in exchange for citizenship?
It is my opinion that the term, "path to citizenship", is doublespeak for amnesty.
I don't get it. Is this guy for it, or against it, or did the quite obviously biased writer/editor take some sort of poetic license here?

Ayatollahgondola 01-17-2010 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerailAmnesty.com (Post 3817)
Path to citizenship? I don't remember hearing those words spoken of favorably.

Did I miss something (seriously)? Was I that out to lunch? Did someone advocate for an amnesty during his or her speech?

Looks like we were both catching that at the same time

Rim05 01-17-2010 08:33 AM

Quote:

"path to citizenship
Anyone who says that to me is immediately put in the pro Illegal column. Remember his name. I would never want him to represent me IF the reporter is telling the truth. Man, you can't believe your own ears any more or is it the reporters ears?

ilbegone 01-18-2010 04:36 AM

Sometimes people hear what they want to hear, or maybe with print journalism shedding writers like it is while it's dying, maybe the writer wrote what the publisher wanted to see in print in order to keep a job.

I'm not really sure what to make of the "mostly white"statement, if it was just an observation or if he meant to convey a message concerning race.

I don't believe he would say "mostly Latino" if he were covering a pro illegal rally, because that would be assumed. I believe it would also be assumed that an anti illegal rally would be mostly white.

A reporter would also never state a ratio of American Citizens to foreign nationals in a pro illegal rally, he would just lump them all into the broad and almost meaningless category of "Latino".

It would probably convey quite a different message if there were occasion to mention a significant number of Latinos in attendance at an anti illegal rally. It all goes back to the brainwashing Americans have gotten over the last two or three generations to the effect that only whites are capable of racism, and to oppose anything which is perceived as having to do with minorities is automatically assumed to be white racism.

Generally I believe reporters aren't to be trusted (NOTHING IS OFF THE RECORD), and regardless of how pissed off they can make you with baiting questions having "gotcha" goals, there needs to be care taken to not piss them off. It will definitely be reflected in the write up.

I believe there should be a dedicated person to talk with the press whom everyone else would direct the reporter to. Otherwise, a reporter might shop around until he gets the quotes he wants to frame the article as befits his beliefs.

Good journalism is objective regardless of the subject, but that's a difficult thing in practice.

DerailAmnesty.com 01-18-2010 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilbegone (Post 3878)
Sometimes people hear what they want to hear, or maybe with print journalism shedding writers like it is while it's dying, maybe the writer wrote what the publisher wanted to see in print in order to keep a job.

This analysis is probably the most likely explanation. This article is hardly the first time SOS members have had an event that was described by the MSM seem barely recognizable in print in comparison to what we recall transpiring.

Unfortunately, dealing with the press is largely a crapshoot for us. Sometimes they report things fairly/accurately, and sometimes they don't. It's not fair but it's what it is.

Jeanfromfillmore 01-18-2010 09:34 AM

We have video of what Roger Gitlin said and will review it. If we find that his views do not coincide with ours, he will not be invited to speak at another event. Let's wait and see, but I heard what he said, and from what I remember, the paper quoted what he said.

Papoose 01-18-2010 10:11 AM

Is he the gent in the blue jeans and white shirt?

Jeanfromfillmore 01-18-2010 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Papoose (Post 3902)
Is he the gent in the blue jeans and white shirt?

Yes. Let me know what you find before you post it.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState 2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved