Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 9 April 2006

Various big media television networks ^ | 9 April 2006 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, April 9th, 2006

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.; Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.; U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.; Reps. Henry Bonilla, R-Texas, Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): Reps. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., and Xavier Becerra, D-Calif.; General Motors Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard Wagoner.

THIS WEEK (ABC): House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio; former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson; actress and animal activist Bernadette Peters.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Kerry; Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.; Khalilzad; retired Gen. Anthony Zinni..

[snugs]

No problem but it also important to show how you pay twice we supposedly pay for it out of our wages but then taxes on other things are also used to fund it.

[eeevil conservative]

great points!!!

yeah- I want an answer too....

[Pukin Dog]

More projection. It aint my fault if you don't get it. I've cast not a single aspersion, but hey, with all the other crap you've spoken, who would notice?

Do yourself a favor and come armed next time if you want to make a point with me. It rarely requires an insult for most of you to feel insulted. Hence, my catchphrase below. It proves true every single day.

[masadaman]

The entire drama is mainly MSM/DNC fiction. Last week and probably tomorrow, 100,000's parade in LA, Phoenix etc. and the lame commentators in the press and network media recalled the glory of Cesar Chavez and the UFW linking his "saintly spirit and courage" to these demonstrators. But no one bothered (wanted?) to point out that Cesar ( a second or third-generation American) led marches agaisnt illegals in Yuma, Bakersfield, Fresno and Salinas in the 1970's.

I called a local news outlet for ABC to explain how they had it upside down. I referenced the Arizona Republic and the California newspapers. Guess what? The 'Tiffany' on the other end told me that although they could research the articles, they had better sources and that they 'did not have time to deal with a contention which is ridiculous.'

Truth is, there wouldn't be a UFW without closed borders: one can't enforce a union rate card when illegals are swarming. So bias seems to trump truth and logic with the MSM once again.

[rockrr]

"I know you are, but what am I?"

I did read your tagline. I thought it particularly funny considering your, er interesting approach to interpersonal communications ;'}

[Morgan in Denver]

In this case I printed it and I'm sitting here looking at it, which was the only reason I made the correction. Also in the file is this:

Not working illegals 3.9 million
Working illegals is 7.2 million
4.9% of all workers are illegal immigrants

Illegals:
Farming 24%
Cleaning 17%
Construction 14%
Food preparation 12%
Manufacturing 9%
Transport 7%
and 2% of all other occupations

One interesting graphic was if farm wages grew -

US Average spent on fruits and vegetables in 2004 $370
Farmers receive about $65 of that
Farm workers typically get a third or less of the farmers share, or $22

The two salient points to this are
1. "A 40% rise in the average wage (now $8.83 an hour) would lift those workers above poverty level incomes."
2. "That adds $9 to the $370 cost of produce, about 2 or 3 cents per dollar."

[Chuck54]

We need a conservative broadcaster to jump on the Saddam document bandwagon, someone who will read a new document on every show,...

O'Reilly may be the best one for this. His conservative credentials are questionable at times but he has the widest audience every night on the cable networks.

I don't think having Hannity on H&C would work as well because of the loon, Colmes. Greta couldn't work it in between the latest missing or dead blonde.

Forget Scarborough, he hasn't been conservative since Moby Dick was a minnow.

[MNJohnnie]

tell me again why we'd be paying $5 a head for lettuce without illegals.

Prove your assumptions that we would only have to increase wages 7% to replace the illegals. Again, factoid. No way to know how much you would have to increase wages to replace the illegals. Considering the number of disease outbreaks that have happened from buying "cheap Mexican" vegetables and fruits you may want to reconsider just casting off ALL regulation and control over food production to by cheap goods.

[Miss Marple]

Well, your point got sidetracked on the domestic economy discussion. I am quite concerned about the Mexican election. People who dislike Fox should be worried about his successor. Fox will be gone. The election is between the candidate from his party and the anti-American opposition. Right now it looks like the anti-American will win, and this controversy in America sure isn't hurting his case.

What in the heck are people going to do if the anti-American guy actively encourages illegal immigration, and I don't mean with a stupid brochure on how to survive in the desert. What if this new president offers a cash payment to every family who sends one member north? What if he cuts off gas and oil? What if he decides to ally with Iran?

That is the stuff that makes me worry, not lettuce prices. People always complain, right up to the point where they get something even worse.

[kabar]

Keep in mind. This is all based on unsubstantiated assumption. Considering they are an advocacy group, their assumptions are going to be skewed one way. Another group doing the same "study" using a different set of assumptions would draw a completely different conclusion.

You have to verify the data that the study is based on. For example, the US Census Bureau data are considered fairly reliable and accurate. The CIS report on Where Immigrants Live An Examination of State Residency of the Foreign Born by Country of Origin in 1990 and 2000 is based on that data. Whatever interpretation I wish to make based on the data, we can agree that the number of states which have Mexican born residents as their largest contributor of foreign born residents has risen from 18 in 1990 to 30 in 2000. The number of Mexican-born residents in North Carolina has risen from 8,751 in 1990 to 179,236. These are objective facts.

Really need to carefully consider sources and motivations on this. Without any clear grasp of the total population of illegals and their income, no way to know the real cost benefit analysis.

I understabd that CIS has an agenda. I agree we shouldn't just accept their interpretation or views. They should be held to the same standard as any other group in terms of the accuracy of their data, assumptions, and logic.

Maybe the tax dollars generate are MORE then costs, maybe less. We do not know. Too many variable. Let take Health Care. How much of the cost is actually improvements in technology and medicine that costs more? Easy to blame the illegal for the cost increases, hard to prove they are or aren't responsible. Growing populations ALWAYS generate increased costs. Some of these costs would happened EVEN if you had no illegals. No way to know how much or how little.

To begin with, we don't even know how many illegals are here. Estimates range from 11 to 20 million. However, this does not mean that you cannot take known data and extrapolate. For instance, the CIS study, The High Cost of Cheap Labor Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget, uses the following methodology:

Overall Approach. To estimate the impact of households headed by illegal aliens, we rely heavily on the National Research Council's (NRC) 1997 study, "The New Americans." Like that study, we use the March Current Population Survey (CPS) and the decennial Census, both collected by the Census Bureau. We use the March 2003 CPS, which asks questions about income, household structure, and use of public services in the calendar year prior to the survey. We control total federal expenditures and tax receipts by category to reflect actual expenditures and tax payments. Like the NRC, we assume that immigrants have no impact on defense-related expenditures and therefore assign those costs only to native-headed households. Like the NRC, we define a household as persons living together who are related. Individuals living alone or with persons to whom they are unrelated are treated as their own households. As the NRC study points out, a "household is the primary unit through which public services are consumed and taxes paid." Following the NRC's example of using households, many of which include U.S.-citizen children, as the unit of analysis makes sense because the presence of these children and the costs they create are a direct result of their parents having been allowed to enter and remain in country. Thus, counting services used by these children allows for a full accounting of the costs of illegal immigration.

Identifying Illegal Aliens in Census Bureau Data. While the CPS does not ask respondents if they are illegal aliens, the Urban Institute, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and the Census Bureau have used socio-demographic characteristics in the data to estimate the size and characteristics of the illegal population. To identify illegal aliens in the survey, we used citizenship status, year of arrival in the United States, age, country of birth, educational attainment, sex, receipt of welfare programs, receipt of Social Security, veteran status, and marital status. This method is based on some very well-established facts about the characteristics of the illegal population. In some cases, we assume that individuals have zero chance of being an illegal alien, such as naturalized citizens, veterans, and individuals who report that they personally receive Social Security benefits or cash assistance from a welfare program or those who are enrolled in Medicaid. However, other members of a household, mainly the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, can and do receive these programs. We estimate that there were 8.7 million illegal aliens included in the March 2003 CPS. By design, our estimates for the size and characteristics of the illegal population are very similar to those prepared by the Census Bureau, the INS, and the Urban Institute.

I think it is important to identify the problem and its impact on our society economically, culturally, and historically. What we are seeing now is unprecedented. We are in uncharted waters. We may quibble about some of the numbers and the economic impact, but huge numbers of illegal aliens are entering our country and their impact no longer is confined to the border states. As a matter of public policy and national security, something needs to be done to secure our borders and identify who is illegally in our country.

[Peach]

The RNC has put out a press release regarding Kerry's appearance on MTP today. It's hilarious and evident that Kerry is delusional.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1611999/posts

[Txsleuth]

LOL!!

[eeevil conservative]

GREAT POST!

FANTASTIC!

Thanks!!!

[MNJohnnie]

Again, what if it's 20 million illegals and all the assumption are off by 50%? We have construction companies here in MN that pay $12-15 and hour STARTING and cannot get good help.

So tell me, the where is all this "American" labor, with a 4.7% unemployment rate, EVEN if you double wages, is coming from WHERE? Are those workers going to be worth a crap? Sorry but my experience is NO they will not be. The ranters can rave that Americans will take those jobs, I don't see it here in MN at double the wages mentioned. Face it, we have a LOT of lazy people. We don't like to think it but we do.

[Miss Marple]

LOL! Good for them! I hope they faxed a copy to Kerry's office.

[rcocean]

Its even worse than I thought.

4 out of 11 million aren't even working!

And how can Bush claim Illegals are doing jobs Americans won't do, when 83% of cleaning workers are Legals or US citizens?!

Thanks for the info. Its good to have facts for a change.

[AliVeritas]

re: Fitzy

Not to mention the case (that was still in process), in which Judith Miller warned the Islamic office that they were coming with a subpeona. Seems like a conflict witness wise, even though Fitz was acting in another capacity.

[rcocean]

"Prove your assumptions that we would only have to increase wages 7% to replace the illegals. Again, factoid. No way to know how much you would have to increase wages to replace the illegals. Considering the number of disease outbreaks that have happened from buying "cheap Mexican" vegetables and fruits you may want to reconsider just casting off ALL regulation and control over food production to by cheap goods."

I don't understand this. Is directed at me?

Who stated we would have to increase wages by 7%? I didn't. And who is favor of "casting off all regulations over food production"?

[eeevil conservative]

LOL!!

Now I really feel insulted...

I have NO CLUE WHAT YOU JUST SAID!

;-)

[eeevil conservative]