SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Oeconomicus who wrote (59897)6/12/2007 8:24:30 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
<< " Who said anything about "scot free" >>

In your response you said;

<< "In that SAME CBS/NY Times poll, 62% said illegals who had been here more than two years should be allowed to keep their jobs and apply for permanent residence..." >>

So I'd have to say you did.

And no, I don't think that properly informing people about the pathetic lack of enforcement of current laws would lead to, "a ridiculously loaded and leading question, not suitable for an objective poll" - that's the established MO of the MSM in their polls. If you want reasonably objective, reality based responses to a poll, you need a reasonably informed public, not one that's intentionally misled. The main reason you'd get a 90%+ response rate to a question asking whether some form of penalty was appropriate even for illegals who had been here more than two years would happen if the general public knew how utterly pathetic current enforcement of immigration laws has been for the last 2 decades. But the general public isn't properly informed because it doesn't fit the liberal MSM's agenda.

And that's one more reason (among many) why you got the ridiculous poll responses you have cited in those fraudulent MSM polls. The American public has been thoroughly misinformed & intentionally misled by the MSM.

Also, I don't think that what Newsbusters did was cherry picking. Like any other conservative blog or news source they know full well how utterly bogus agenda driven, fraudulent MSM polling is. So when they find responses that run counter to the desired MSM response that the MSM itself most likely didn't report (or accurately report) they should point out those inconsistent responses. Perhaps they should do a better job of pointing out the long established history of fraudulent MSM polling to give better context to their reporting, but like this post, it tends to make them excessively long to repeat an issue most readers already know about.