Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Confronted by facts and figures O'Reilly won't let guest Gabriel Camacho make his points

Reported by Chrish - April 11, 2006

First off on The O'Reilly Factor tonight was the big BORe's Talking Points Memo (see inadvertant truth on next page) wherein he ranted about the immigration problem as he sees it, people who disagree with him, and the solution he demands: "Let it be done."

He followed that with a segment featuring Michelle Malkin and Linda Chavez in which he says we'll get "two other views". Malkin's pretty much mirrored O'Reilly's in that they both are calling for sealing the Mexican border first. Chavez leads in with "I, like you, Bill, want to secure our borders" but she wants to also ensure that the cheap labor supply doesn't get cut off. So much for other views; they disagree on which order policies should be implemented.

O'Reilly invites Chavez to "do the math": there's 12 million here now. Most will get a path to legalization and will want to bring their relatives that "in my mind, in the next five years, means 25 million more people in the USA." That number, 25 million, is the product of his fevered, fearful imagination, frantic with worry over what that'll do to his property values on Long Island. Moments later he says to Malkin "First we have to rebuild the dike, because if you don't, you got 12 here now, in five years you'll have another 15..." He's pulling numbers out of *thin air* again!

I have to mention that in her turn Michelle Malkin made the incredible statement: "People have forgotten that September 11th happened because of lax immigration enforcement, period." Ignoring the issue and agents desperate pleas and the PDB titled "Bin Laden determined to strike within United States" had nothing to do with it. And from that bastion of liberalism the Cato Institute:

Long-time opponents of immigration seized on September 11 to argue against legalization of Mexican migration, and in favor of drastic cuts in existing levels of legal immigration. But any connection between the September 11 attacks and illegal immigration from Mexico is non-existent. None of the 19 hijackers entered the country illegally or as immigrants. They all arrived in the United States with valid temporary nonimmigrant tourist or student visas. None of them arrived via Mexico. None of them were Mexican. Sealing the Mexican border with a three-tiered, 2,000-mile replica of the Berlin Wall patrolled by a division of U.S. troops would not have kept a single one of those terrorists out of the United States.

The next segment, "The Rundown" was to air the other side of the debate. Unfortunately for the polite, frustrated guest, much of his argument could not be heard through O'Reilly's interruptions and chants.

According to O'Reilly, the press won't tell you this but there is a strong movement to have few controls on immigration, a so-called open borders policy. His next guest subscribes, at least somewhat, to that school of thought.

Gabrielle Camacho of the American Friends Service Committee has the old-fashioned idea that people come here because they have a better chance of making a good life here. He says we have to ask why people leave their homes, their families, their communities, and make a perilous journey to come here? O'Reilly says that's nice to discuss in a theoretical way, and Camacho does manage to get in that no, that's not theory, that's the reality. They agree that people come here because they can't make a living in Central America, but O'Reilly says that nobody has the right, the fundamental human right, to come to any country and make a living. Camacho wants to back up and address why people can no longer make a decent living south of the border, and O'Reilly jumps in with a quick (dismissive) answer: corruption and a poorly developed economy, that's why. Camacho agrees that corruption plays a part in it, but brings up NAFTA and IMF and World Bank restructuring policies which created labor dislocation.

O'Reilly argues that the Mexican government pushed for NAFTA and says that the brutal truth is that Mexico has never been able to support its population despite having enormous resources and a large tourism industry. It is an out of control country. We have no responsibility to take their workers who cannot make a living there because their government is inept.

Camacho says that Mexico was doing well on its own in the '50s, '60s and '70s, and because of World Bank and IMF neo-liberal policies in the '80s imposing structural readjustment policies, the economy collapsed. O'Reilly is disgusted by this train of thought, saying that it is still Mexico's problem not ours, but Camacho insist, the US is very influential in these institutions. Camacho had a point to make and O'Reilly interrupted; Camacho asked let me just finish, please and O'Reilly said, both pointers drawn and ready to fire, "hold it, hold it, hold it. Let me just cut through this." Comment: this is his "no-spin" shtick, turning complex policy discussions into moronic soundbites his viewers can easily digest and regurgitate. He distorted: "So you believe that every Mexican has a right to come here because we don't handle the World Bank the right way?" Camacho said that if our economic and military policies abroad cause labor dislocation, we've got to own up to that, (music begins to play) and we have to examine what's going to happen 5 years from now, 10 years... O'Reilly is all for that (see above math) and says no country is perfect but if everyone around the world who gets hosed because of perceived US ineptitude gets to come here, that's insane. O'Reilly meant the segment to end on that derogatory note but Camacho kept on, saying he doesn't think it's perceived, Mr. O'Reilly. BORe says, well, that's your opinion, and Camacho says no, there are very real facts and figures around this. O'Reilly says they don't have the right to come here because we're exploiting them; you can always make that accusation. Camacho tries to respond but BORe repeats "you can always make that accusation" - twice. He dramas on that everyone in Africa and the Middle East can come here because we're the exploiters, as his guest tries to speak. Camacho finally gets in "Can I get a word in here?" and O'Reilly asys "I gotta go."

Here's Billy at his hypocritical best during TPM:
O'Reilly: "It's long past time for Americans to reject that kind of tactic .... don't make the mistake of directing your ire towards individuals!" Hear, hear!!!

Post a comment

Remember Me?

We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.