Just following orders.

[cash]

I don't know that complete neutrality is an attainable goal, but you can look to sources that spend their money on sending reporters into the world - especially the world beyond Washington briefings - to observe events and then report back on what they saw.

Look at a news source and ask yourself: what percentage of it is canned political briefings, "analysis," and hyped human interest on one side, versus reporters out in the world following stories and sharing them? The unfortunate reality is that many news outlets do shockingly little reporting.

I've long thought that there is room for a high quality newspaper with national ambitions located somewhere in middle America. I wish someone with capital would buy a paper like the Dallas Morning News, Kansas City Star, Denver Post, or NOLA Times-Picayune and try to reach a national audience with high quality reporting about the world away from the coasts on the level of the WSJ/NYT/NPR, but with a bit more culturally conservative perspective. I suspect that the reason much of Trump's America has written off the media as nothing but spin and opinion is that the media rarely engages with the realities that they are experiencing as anything other than a social problem to be solved.

All journalism is not equally bad or flawed, and good journalism can be done without infinite resources. For example, my industry's little trade rag with a circulation of 60,000 does amazing reporting. For example, here's a recent piece of boots-on-the-ground-outside-Washington reporting that far exceeds in depth, hustle, and explanatory power anything I've ever seen come out of the national arm of Fox News: A Dying Town - The Chronicle of Higher Education

There has been a loss of curiosity about, and fidelity to, facts on the populist right. That 30% of the population's denigration of both reporting and a world constrained by facts does not in fact mean that journalism is all crap. For the other 70% of the political landscape, from the NYT to the WSJ to NPR, journalism is thriving.

It could be happening in Colorado.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/denv...orado-sun.html

[BBB]

Salon,
Isn't this more informative than just "he's a #$@%@%@-er"??

Thank you for the latest round of postings. I learn more when I'm reading thoughtful info from you folks, than just insulting rants.

I feel like I have to re-state my position form time to time: I was not pro Trump- but I was anti-Hillary. Your feeling for Trump mirror my feelings for the Clintons. Enough said on that.

Yes, there are sides. There shouldn't be. But whatever you want to label them, they exist. And by saying "there is no left" says (to me) the left deeply feels "they" are the gold standard and the ones who are "right" where the other parties are "wrong".

As President Obama stated: “Elections have consequences.” He was right.

You can have good commentary and say the guy is a dick. They are not incompatible notions.

[jclay]

Short article with an interesting historical perspective. It's worth a read. What Happens When a Bad-Tempered, Distractible Doofus Runs an Empire? | The New Yorker

[jclay]

I like it! Dear Europe, if you want to stop Trump, sanction his companies | Keith Ellison | Opinion | The Guardian

[TTX1]

Someone help me find the “fake” narrative in this news...

3 Charts That Show What's Actually Happening Along The Southern Border : NPR

[monadnocky]

Someone help me find the “fake” narrative in this news...

3 Charts That Show What's Actually Happening Along The Southern Border : NPR

I guarantee that if you showed this chart to a large swath of Americans (and encouraged them to look at the source to ensure that there's no political bias per se), they would simply not believe it. It's worth repeating here.

Screen Shot 2018-06-23 at 7.57.40 AM.png

[jclay]

Yes, there are sides. There shouldn't be. But whatever you want to label them, they exist.

There will always be different perspectives but one hopes that we're all coming from the perspective of some larger, shared framework that aims to improve the human condition as widely as possible.

The GOP has been remarkably effective at identifying and inflaming folks around wedge issues. That's an intrinsically, societally destructive approach and you can see the results in the degradation of current civil discourse, extreme positions and in history books. It uses classic demagoguery in advancement of it's aims, which are neither what they say they are nor what their public thinks they are; no long term good will come of it. If you (one) truly believe that the current leaders of the GOP support a broad based representative democracy you are being conned.

I'll continue to say it: Read “Democracy in Chains” or at least find a decent summary; Nancy McLean found physical evidence in the writings of James Buchannan; she set out only to research the white reaction to de-segregation in Virginia and stumbled into the repository of his works, writings & communications concerning political economy. What she found was staggering.

I have a number of strenuous issues with the Clintons and Obama but I didn't see them or the Democratic Party engage in behavior destructive to the fabric of society. Both parties subscribe to neo-liberal economics, support way too much de-regulation of large industry and are far too quick with destructive foreign policies; working class, and increasingly white collar, folks have been economically hurt and anger is reasonable. But the DP is clearly (to me) the lesser of the two evils in those arenas.

And by saying "there is no left" says (to me) the left deeply feels "they" are the gold standard and the ones who are "right" where the other parties are "wrong".

Every side feels they're right. What we have to decide is what sort of society we want to live in. I've been to countries with small, corrupt and ineffective governments. They invariably have huge impoverished populations. I wouldn't want to live in them even as a member of their financial 0.0001%. What I, and I hope most of us if asked outside of a contentious political framework, want to see is a large and financially secure middle class; an upwardly mobile and reasonably decent life for the lowest economic classes; cradle to grave health care for everyone in this country in the most cost efficient manner possible from a system which won't bankrupt individuals/families; job training and higher education thats maximally accessible; clean air/water; reduction of poverty; migration to a more sustainable physical infrastructure; cessation of our very long list of destructive foreign policies, and that sort of thing. The current incarnation of the GOP is egregiously heading in the opposite direction and Trump is making it measurably worse. Hillary was bad news in some of those areas but not all of them. On the other hand, maybe we have to travel this road in order to find a more progressive direction. That is unfortunate but the historical precedent is pretty solid.

One thing we don't have to do in the mean time is to make a bad situation worse by damaging already fragile families and children. Few people, regardless of party affiliation, think that porous borders and uncontrolled immigration are good things. Trump and the GOP have been throwing gasoline on the issue in order to gain political primacy. The Democratic Party didn't resort to such abhorrent actions.

[jclay]

^^^ And if you (one) buys not much more than that, you're progressive.

[bcm119]

Someone help me find the “fake” narrative in this news...

3 Charts That Show What's Actually Happening Along The Southern Border : NPR

For Trump's base, it's not about facts, it's about feelings. For those with little education, their world view is shaped by anecdotes. Statistics are elitist bs. If dems continue to fight feelings with facts, they will lose again in 2020.

[Mabouya]

If dems continue to fight feelings with facts, they will lose again in 2020.

I think it depends on where the "middle ground" voters are. Not everyone votes purely based on feelings.

[0nelove]

So, after 8 pages of ranting, who actually has a solution???

Too many of you seem to be under the illusion that immigration is better in any part of the known universe. News for all y'all: it isn't.

Immigration in Europe is actually far stricter than here. Same with South America. I can't comment on Arab nations, Asia, or Russia, but I have a sneaking hunch that they might be pretty strict too.

As someone who grew up watching illegal immigrant's children go to school for free, eat for free twice a day, and the majority show at best apathy and at worst be downright violent and awful, I wonder how many of you experienced the same? Who had the police in their schools because these people and their gangs threatened to kill everyone? Mmm, Bueller?

There is no easy solution. Something needs to be done. Ignoring it does no good. Compassion must be exercised, but unless all of the critics are riding to their mansions on unicorns each day, maybe try being a little more pragmatic?

[Matthew Strongin]

As someone who grew up watching illegal immigrant's children go to school for free, eat for free twice a day, and the majority show at best apathy and at worst be downright violent and awful, I wonder how many of you experienced the same? Who had the police in their schools because these people and their gangs threatened to kill everyone? Mmm, Bueller?

Where did you grow up? It would help your point to understand how schools and school lunch programs are funded in that city. Many undocumented immigrants pay taxes (https://itep.org/wp-content/uploads/...tributions.pdf) and in many cities, particularly in states with no state income tax, schools are funded by local property tax and sales tax. Sales tax is certainly paid by anyone purchasing goods, including undocumented immigrants. Property tax is generally paid by home owners, not renters, so anyone going to schools in a district who don't own a home in the same district could be considered to be going to school for free. I'd also add, as a homeowner who pays taxes, many of them for services I don't leverage, who cares. Tracking the independent contribution and distribution of tax monies and services isn't how taxes work. I'll gladly pay towards services that generally improve my city and don't mind people consuming those services who may not contribute as much or at all.

Also related to immigrants and their "cost" or burden on the economy: Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees - The New York Times

And, to answer your question, I'm born and raised and living again in Miami, which wouldn't be a stretch to say is one of the most diverse and immigrant heavy populations in the country. As a white, non-hispanic I grew up a minority and as the population has grown the percentage of this city that looks like me has continued to decrease. But the apathy and violence I see isn't limited to immigrants. Probably the opposite. In fact, if not for immigrants, this city would be a podunk beach town without the art, culture, or energy that forms its identity.

I'd also suggest that comparing the US to homogenous countries with no significant history of immigration in their modern history ignores how we were founded, the principles that shaped our country and the fact that most of us can trace how our ancestors came here in just a few generations.

As for a solution, there are probably a number of ways to improve our immigration policy to both reflect our collective values and strengthen our national security. But we'd need to start with a common set of facts, and that seems less and less likely these days. It's impossible to agree on a solution when one side sees immigrants, as a collective whole*, as violent freeloaders who steal our jobs (which is wonderful twist of logic) and the other side sees them, as a collective whole*, as hard working people escaping incredible difficulties who come here for a better life, willing to do the jobs that Americans won't do and strengthening the fabric of this country.

*PS - I'm not interested in anecdotes. Anecdotes can be shaped to tell any story anyone wants, like parading 15 victims of crime perpetrated by immigrants as perverse synecdoche to represent an entire diverse population. I'd like us to settle on facts. Actual data that provides a broad view of contributions and impacts for informed decision making.

[caleb]

So, after 8 pages of ranting, who actually has a solution???

This week Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, put it this way:

“It’s difficult in any event, right, in an election year where the president has decided to have this at the forefront of the Republican election strategy to paint the Democrats as soft on immigration.”

If the stats don't make it abundantly clear, there is no actual immigration crisis. We are currently at very low levels of both legal and illegal immigration. This entire conversation is a response to the strategic creation of an issue for the midterm elections.

The problem is not immigration. The problem is incumbents in the majority party trying to get re-elected.

The solution is for a campaign based on demonizing other people to backfire.

[davids]

I'd also suggest that comparing the US to homogenous countries with no significant history of immigration in their modern history ignores how we were founded, the principles that shaped our country and the fact that most of us can trace how our ancestors came here in just a few generations.


*PS - I'm not interested in anecdotes. Anecdotes can be shaped to tell any story anyone wants, like parading 15 victims of crime perpetrated by immigrants as perverse synecdoche to represent an entire diverse population. I'd like us to settle on facts. Actual data that provides a broad view of contributions and impacts for informed decision making.

There's a lot I love about Matt's post, but I'll just highlight and reinforce these two items.

Almost every last US citizen is either an immigrant or the descendant of immigrants. That is the grand experiment of this nation. The people sneaking over our borders for a better life? That's us.

The moral lesson that we can all draw from this fact goes back to the roots of my religion and (although some will point at other parts of the Bible) it's worth noting that it is a lesson repeated at least thirty-six times. Here's two of them:

When strangers sojourn with you in your land, you shall not do them wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love them as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. - Leviticus 19:33-34

Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the immigrant, the orphan, and the widow. - Deuteronomy 27:19

This is the morality I was raised on. Love the stranger because my people were strangers. Do justice without regard to a person's status. These aren't meaningless words. These are instructions for being a moral human being.

And anecdotes? I can, of course, counter every one of 0nelove's with one of my own about the hard-working, upstanding immigrants I know, work with, and live amongst. And in the context of this worldwide issue my personal experience is just as meaningless as his.

[fastupslowdown]

what makes this difficult is of course the u.s. should be in control of its borders, but i'm reminded that the democrats were ready to give trump a deal and then trump balked and started focusing on legal immigration. a lot of what we're hearing from the administration and its allies is code for making america white again

[vertical_doug]

what makes this difficult is of course the u.s. should be in control of its borders, but i'm reminded that the democrats were ready to give trump a deal and then trump balked and started focusing on legal immigration. a lot of what we're hearing from the administration and its allies is code for making america white again

Code? When the National Park Service grants a permit to the group that marched in Charlottesville for August 11 that the organizers call 'White Civil Rights Rally' , I don't think it is code any longer, more like blatant in your face.

[XR2]

I believe Trump manufactured this situation and made it public so he could bolster sagging numbers and poke the Democrats in the eye. It's all a dog and pony show. The National Security angle is a joke. We're circling the drain folks.

[Dallas Tex]

I guarantee that if you showed this chart to a large swath of Americans (and encouraged them to look at the source to ensure that there's no political bias per se), they would simply not believe it. It's worth repeating here.

Screen Shot 2018-06-23 at 7.57.40 AM.png

Do you even have a basic understanding of what this chart is telling you? Is this speaking to a lack of enforcement that ends in arrest or apprehension? Or is it proposing that the volume of illegal border crossing is reducing?

I didn't read the article, I just looked at the chart.

[davids]

Do you even have a basic understanding of what this chart is telling you? Is this speaking to a lack of enforcement that ends in arrest or apprehension? Or is it proposing that the volume of illegal border crossing is reducing?

I didn't read the article, I just looked at the chart.

Those are good questions. Why don't you read this article?

And here's another interesting article, with a decent dose of nuance.

[0nelove]

as hard working people escaping incredible difficulties who come here for a better life, willing to do the jobs that Americans won't do and strengthening the fabric of this country.

Of course, and they can and should, as they mostly always have: LEGALLY. There are plenty of ways to do so for both rich and poor, priviledge and refugee.

My family on both sides went through Ellis. My wife (from a Southern European country) and I went through the immigration process under Obama.

Regardless of if you're interested in anecdotes, first hand stories are often much better than official data which can and is manipulated, especially in countries with what so many of you are calling a dictator. Yet, on the inverse, you ask for data. Its pretty absurd and the ambiguity of choosing or not choosing to accept stories or data at any given point is a little maddening when trying to have a debate..

I can guarentee you that N. Korea among others have tons of official "data" about how great everything it. Franco had the world's greatest country. So did Castro. Pol Pot too. Not to mention Hitler and his "data." That's why journalism has historically been important. See my point?

So, in relating my "anecdote," I can tell you that the process in that era was pretty much humilating, not to mention costing around $5,000 when all was said and done. It took about a year and a half which was rocket time. Nonetheless, the questions and manner of treatment was humiliating and we were treated like dogs, certainly not people welcomed with open arms. Early morning phone calls on Saturdays with interogative questions trying to catch lies, etc. I will never forget a family absolutely balling after the mother was denied because she didn't perform well enough in the interview. Or sitting in a waiting cell at the airport upon the official immigration and watching the police literally take a person's cell phone and throw it against the wall as everyone sat watching in horror and silence at the scene. Guess we should have just done it illegally and then cried when the law came knocking?

And since you completely marginalized my point about immigration in other countries, because they are "hommogenous," sorry, how about some....ahhhmmm....data? Sure, some are hommogenous, but your suggestion that they all are, or that other countries haven't or aren't experiencing severe strain under immigration, both internally and externally, while simultaneously being much more strict than the U.S., is just not very well informed.

How about Cananda for example...any of the, "I'm moving to Canada," people actually try to immigrate? Nope, none of you. Why? Because they - would - not - let - you. Trudeau might seem altruistic, but only when talking about other people's problems. In fact, under Trudeau they now require a visa just to pass through their airports. Why? They don't want you. You, or anyone else.


Like I said, its complicated, but to pretend there exhists a solution with or without ANY leader in ANY country is absurd. You all might as well start yelling at clouds.