« Westboro Haters Forced to Retreat | Main | Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™ »

That which we call a rose-gardener...

The Boston Globe (owned by the New York Times) is one of the great bastions of political correctness. Everything has to be called by its sensitive, polite name, even if it distorts the true meaning. This has been especially true in the area of illegal aliens.

I have lost count of the time I have seen illegal aliens be transformed with a wave of the keyboard into "undocumented workers" or simpy "immigrants" within the pages of the Glob. It's like they have a rule there: the only difference between legal and illegal immigrants is purely technical, so it's hateful and discriminatory and just plain mean to distinguish between the two groups. Anyone who favors actually enforcing existing laws against the illegal ones is a racist and a bigot and a xenophobe who hates all immigrants; they're just more open about admitting it against the illegal ones. Sooner or later the "America For Americans, All Foreigners Out" baser instincts will kick in, so we have to nip it in the bud.

Well, if there is such a rule formally written down at the Boston Globe, there's a little footnote attached to it:

"Undocumented workers and immigrants may be referred to as 'illegal aliens' when the usage will hurt those we disagree with politically."

Read the story carefully. You'll notice a lot of the typical anti-illegal-immigration buzzwords and catchphrases that the Globe so normally decries when used by others. The man who hired the illegal aliens' employer of record "never inquired about their status" -- but they're not supposed to. That's not their responsibility. The Globe says it independently verified one worker's legal documents, but they're not supposed to be able to access those records.

So, why is the Globe, normally the champion of these "undocumented workers" who are "just doing the jobs Americans can't be bothered to do" throwing this one company that helps out the poor and downtrodden, paying them $9 to $10/hour tax-free, to the wolves?

Because they are being sacrificed for A Greater Good -- smearing a Republican who is just might be the next GOP presidential nominee.

Mr. Saenz, the owner of Community Lawn Care With A Heart, the employer in question, needs to learn a bit better judgment. Not only in who he hires, but who he takes on as clients -- because if he happens to work for someone the Globe is out to get, he can kiss goodbye any good will he might have earned from them and will get tossed under the bus without a second thought.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference That which we call a rose-gardener...:

» Joust The Facts linked with And This Is Romney's Fault, How?

» And Rightly So! linked with He never asked for papers

» Conservative Outpost linked with Daily Summary

» Maggie's Farm linked with Saturday Links

Comments (31)

Jay wrote this about the Gl... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Jay wrote this about the Globe's publishers: "Undocumented workers and immigrants may be referred to as 'illegal aliens' when the usage will hurt those we disagree with politically."

Using the simple search function at the Globe's website I got this result:

Your search for "illegal immigrants" returned 299 matches from boston.com -- Searched: Last 365 days

It would appear from the search results that the Globe has produced almost one story a day using the term "illegal immigrants". Wow. They write a lot of stories which are published to " hurt those we disagree with politically"...

...or maybe they don't. I didn't take the time to register at the Globe to gain access to the articles, but it would appear from the headlines that the term has been used in stories that have no conceivable connection to politicians.

So, Jay, let me toss some questions back at you.

Before you wrote this blog post, which appears to me to be just another unfounded conservative blog attack on the mainstream media, did you search the Globe first to find instances where the term "illegal immigrants" was used, and check before you published?

Or did you rely solely on your own, perhaps biased, perceptions to libel the Globe?

Did you do so for political purposes, or was this just a "journalistic" effort you thrown together in an attempt to hurt the Globe, and their parent company the New York Times, in some way?

Why do you and other Wizbang writers systematically attack and attempt to discredit the mainstream media? It's an obsession lately, to the tune of one or two posts a day lately.

Is there a coordinate campaign by right-wing bloggers to discredit the mainstream media in the eyes of the public? If so, what is the political aim of this movement?

I'm really curious about this, and hope you will answer and not just threaten to ban me from Wizbang, as you've done numerous times in the past. Heh.

Oh, one last question. The sidebar credits on the Wzbang blog home page lists you as "Section Editor" - what does a "Section Editor" do at Wizbang?

Lee,Before you wro... (Below threshold)

Lee,

Before you wrote your comment, did you read the law?

The Globe thinks its a "big story" that the Governor hired a lawn company, but didn't ask for proof that the workers were legal.

Since when is anyone required to do that?

This is a smear job put on by The Globe, pure and simple. Anyone with a modicum of common sense can see the bias that is in this story, which you couldn't even be bothered to read because it took 2 seconds to register for free.

Moron.

Anyone who knowingly hires ... (Below threshold)

Anyone who knowingly hires a brownie to do a real american's job should be deported to Mexico and see how he likes it there.

We can without Democrats in GOP clothing.

-Steve Niles.

Rightnumber one -- When I f... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Rightnumber one -- When I first clicked on the link I got the story without registering. I see now that registration is required, but i read the story before posting -- did you?

Where in the story does it say that the Globe thinks this is a "big story"? Looks like an everyday, pedestrian story to me. Guess I left my modicum in common sense in my jacket pocket. Where's yours?

"Why do you and other Wi... (Below threshold)
cmd:

"Why do you and other Wizbang writers systematically attack and attempt to discredit the mainstream media?"

Are you actually serious, Lee? You can't be that much of a naif. We attack them because they are LIARS. Flat out, biased, left-wing, borderline treasonous liars.

Unemployment? A scandal when it's at 4% under Bush, greatest economy ever when it's at 6% under Clinton.

Rathergate - "the story is true." Sure. What's the frequency, Kenneth?

The AP - Captain Jamil Hussein, international man of mystery.

Valerie Plame - fearless warrior for truth and justice outed by a vindictive administration when it looks like Cheney or Rove are headed to jail, non-story when we find out Dick (and I mean Dick) Armitage leaked her name.

Saddam's WMD - an absolute truth when Clinton says it, a damnable lie when Bush repeats the Syphilitic Hillbilly's words.

As that man of letters Auric Goldfinger says, "three times is enemy action." The MSM are liars. They are the enemy. They feed you garbage that you spit back out as though it's revealed truth. THAT'S why we attack them, Lee.

Yeah, Lee, I woke up at 5 t... (Below threshold)

Yeah, Lee, I woke up at 5 this morning, raced to my fax machine, got the latest talking points, and got right to work.

Oh, that's right. I don't have a fax machine at home.

You did a bit more thorough research than I did, I freely admit. Perhaps because it's a hot-button issue for me, I tend to remember the instances where they cater to the pro-illegal-alien side of the equation. See here,
here,
here,
here,
and here.

As far as my "job description" as section editor: I don't have one. Kevin promoted me from Guest Writer to Contributing Editor to Section Editor without even bothering to tell me, let alone assign me any duties. So I do what I think is appropriate and needed: clean up typos on postings, clear out the spam from the comments and trackbacks, keep a general eye on the overall tone of things, and warn and/or ban those who grossly offend the basic tenets of propriety and civil behavior. I've also coordinated a couple of "blog-swarms" and a group project here at Wizbang, with our pieces of last 9/11. I also try to keep up with my self-imposed quota of 2-3 original pieces a day.

And I do that around my day job, which doesn't allow time for blogging.

As far as banning you, lee... you haven't been much more than a minor pain in the ass. And I don't ban for that alone. Start plagiarizing, engaging in grossly inappropriate and gratuitous personal insults on others (I tend to shrug off those against myself), spamming, posting excessive off-topic screeds, and I may revisit the matter. But for the most part, you simply nullify your own value just fine on your own without my having to intervene and wield my editor's hammer.

But while I have your attention, lee, make note of two things:

1) I banned the idiot who was impersonating you a few weeks ago.

2) Muirgeo was banned for exploiting my friends' personal tragedies for crass political gains, and ignoring two warnings.

3) You still haven't e-mailed me (jaytea at wizbangblog.com) with your suspected "sock-puppets," months after making the apparently unfounded accusations.

J.

CMD-Right on broth... (Below threshold)

CMD-

Right on brother. Show them what the faggot libtards really are. Expose their hypocrisy!

-STEVE NILES

Quick trivia question: ... (Below threshold)

Quick trivia question:

What do "Steve Niles," "Rob Hackney," "realitycheck," "Pesky Jim," and "Noodelboy" all have in common?

If you guessed "they all post from the same Australian IP," you win a kewpie doll.

Pick a name and stick with it, chump. And I feel fairly comfortable that "Steve Niles," the artist, would not appreciate you hijacking his identity.

J.

Thanks for your response, J... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Thanks for your response, Jay. You didn't address several points, but you did address the primary question, and since you were under no obligation or requirement to answer at all I appreciate it.

I could say more about trolls and bannings, but the application of your policy, as evidenced by the fact that liberal commenters get banned while conservative commenters such as this clown aren't banned, pretty much speaks for itself, and I don't want to be accused of taking the thread off topic or spamming. Some other time perhaps.

Thanks again.

this shows you one of the p... (Below threshold)
superdestroyer:

this shows you one of the problems that the Republicans face to remain viable. Every potential Republican candidates has to realize that their life will examiined in minute detail when they are a viable candidate. The media has learned in 2004 that it can swing elections by examining divorce records. In 2006 it found that outing a Colorado minister that no one had ever heard of could swing a national election (even though it did not affect the referemdum in colorado).

In 2008 every Republican candidate has to realize that at every public appearance they will be subjected to a heckler armed with a video camera. If the candidate ignores the heckler the MSM will portray them as weak. If the candidate responds, the MSM will portray the the candidate as a bully and a thug. If the audience intervenes, the MSM will portray Republicans as intolerant.

The Democrats and the MSM have found two methods that they can use to destroy Republican candidates without ever discussing the issues.

I didn't see that one, lee.... (Below threshold)

I didn't see that one, lee. But if you have a problem with that sort of conduct, take it up first with the author of the original piece. If you don't get a satisfactory answer, then come to me. After me, it's Kevin.

I trust and depend on my colleagues to mind their own threads. They have first call on settling such matters.

As far as coordination or intent... speaking for myself, I simply try to find issues and stories that 1) I feel strongly enough about to write something, and 2) I think I might have something original to contribute. I'm not a "linker," as a general rule. If I can't find something new to add to a discussion, I'll give it a pass. No one tells me what to write or not to write, and the same holds true for my colleagues here. We have pretty much absolute free rein, within certain boundaries of propriety. And these have never been spelled out (except for "no profanities in titles," one I've been the most frequent violator); Kevin just trusts us to be responsible.

If we were some Republican spin-machine, lee, my pieces about the New Hampshire phone-jamming scandal and supporting gay marriage would never see the light of day.

And I trust my five examples of the Boston Globe's prior bias satisfied your complaint?

J.

Jay, why are you responding... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

Jay, why are you responding to Lee?

You are the one making the accusations against the Globe, therefore it is up to the Globe to prove you wrong. You don't have to prove anything.

Isn't that what Lee said concerning the fake AP stories just a few threads down?

My, my, how fast he changes his tune.

I can rememeber when they w... (Below threshold)
spurwing plover:

I can rememeber when they were called WET BACKS

Les, you're right.... (Below threshold)

Les, you're right.

Lee, let me add this to the mix. I have a source who's an editor at the Globe. I know because he says so. He gives me all the dirt on their diabolical plots.

Don't believe me? I verified it. I asked him, in an e-mail, if he was legit. He said he was.

Still don't believe me? Prove me wrong.

Thanks, Les. That was a LOT easier.

J.

Lee said:______<br /... (Below threshold)
Paul in Brookline:

Lee said:
______
Where in the story does it say that the Globe thinks this is a "big story"? Looks like an everyday, pedestrian story to me. Guess I left my modicum in common sense in my jacket pocket.
______

FYI, I have the dead tree edition of the Glob (as we call it around here) on my desk. The story is on the front page, with a large color picture. They sent reporters to **Guatemala** for Pete's sake - they most certainly are pushing this as a big story, and it's an obvious political hit piece.

What's the premise here - is Romney supposed to personally perform a background check on every employee of every business he patronizes? Should he force his way into the kitchen the next time he dines at a restaurant to make sure his dishes aren't washed by an illegal alien?

Have Kennedy or Kerry ever done business with any company that has employed illegal aliens? The Glob has no interest in THAT story.

As someone who reads the Glob every day, I'd say Jay has an excellent point - the Glob's sympathies are clearly and overwhelmingly with the "undocumented worker", and there "news" stories have consistently advocated in-state tuition and other benefits for illegal aliens. Anyone advocating even the mildest enforcement is demonized.

I'd be interested in a similar investigation of the companies hired by the Glob's owners - maybe the Herald could give it a try.

BTW - last year we received a note in our paper from the carrier soliciting money because he "could not obtain a driver's license" and would have to return to Guatemala. Perhaps the Glob could investigate itself. (and no, I don't consider myself responsible for "doing business with an illegal alien" because I paid the Glob for a subscription.)

Grrrr.should be ".... (Below threshold)
Paul in Brookline:

Grrrr.

should be "...and their "news" stories...", not "there"

Proof, THEN post.

Thanks for your response... (Below threshold)

Thanks for your response, Jay. You didn't address several points....

Posted by: Lee

You still haven't e-mailed me (jaytea at wizbangblog.com) with your suspected "sock-puppets," months after making the apparently unfounded accusations.

J.

Posted by: Jay Tea

You didn't address all the points either, Lee. In fact, you downright dodge that one. . . again.

Tommorrow's headlines at th... (Below threshold)

Tommorrow's headlines at the Globe:

Romney eats salad toiled over by illegal alien in Boston restaurant!

Geez..why is anyone stunned... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:

Geez..why is anyone stunned..shocked or surprised about what media tells us is important...we have become a 2nd rate People Magizine..National Enquirer..Today show..Fox anything..etc..society.
We are a nation who can't get enough of celebrity weddings and divorces because it is so much easier than to force ourselves to ponder more complex issues..that have no definite answer...
....All media gives the people what they want..and it sure isn't critical thing..
....remember it was MTV that gave us the critical insight that Clinton wore boxers and not briefs..
..that is something only Monica and others needed to know...
............Because for the first time..in like forever..the Presidents race is wide open...it is going to get very weird for all candiddates and maybe candidates...
...by the way..to me the term alien has been fixed by movies and TV to mean from off of earth...

Lee: "Why do you and oth... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Lee: "Why do you and other Wizbang writers systematically attack and attempt to discredit the mainstream media? It's an obsession lately, to the tune of one or two posts a day lately.

Is there a coordinate campaign by right-wing bloggers to discredit the mainstream media in the eyes of the public? If so, what is the political aim of this movement?"

It's called "Swift-boating", Lee. The simplest way to define that is that when a common belief or understanding is simply 100% false and someone points out that the common belief or understanding is not true and states clearly and simply what the truth is.

In this case, the common belief is that the "Mainstream Media" only objectively reports the whole truth in their news stories. The truth is that the MSM is far left biased and only reports about 10% of each story that supports the far left, socialist regressive worldview. They also totally ignore anything that lacks that 10% that they can twist and distort.

So when bloggers like Jay point this out, they are simply "Swift-boating" the MSM.

"You didn't address all ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"You didn't address all the points either, Lee. In fact, you downright dodge that one. . . again."

Jay is doing a fine job of outing the sockpuppets, and shouldn't rely on my help. Frankly, I lost interest in the sockuppet trolls on Wizbang a long time ago, but Jay keeps dragging up a request I made 8 months ago every time I'm even just slightly critical of something he writes. Wow, I'm shocked.

The fact that you don't have anything better that this to bring up tells me you agree with everything else I've written here. Thanks for your support, Logan.

Doesn't it hurt bending you... (Below threshold)

Doesn't it hurt bending your arm around to pat yourself on the back all the time?

How quick they forget. Two ... (Below threshold)
Ed:

How quick they forget. Two years ago the Globe did story after story whacking Kerry. It's not a liberal bias, it's a "he's from here, so we better find anything we can" bias against local pols going National. It's how unknown reporters make their bones.

Because they are b... (Below threshold)
Larkin:
Because they are being sacrificed for A Greater Good -- smearing a Republican who is just might be the next GOP presidential nominee.

Why is this a smear? The article doesn't say that Romney knew that these workers were illegal.

Romney should respond by thanking the Globe for discovering this and seeking out a new landscaping company that does not employ illegals. Instead of responding defensively, he could use this to point out how widespread the problem is and lend some publicity to landscaping firms that are fully legal.

After all, I am sure he would argue that there are plenty of American citizens who are willing to mow his lawn for him right?


Not only did they send repo... (Below threshold)

Not only did they send reporters to Guatemala, they staked out his house for weeks.

As for the search above, there are 318 hits for "illegal immigration" over the past five years, 308 for "undocumented workers" over the past five years, and just 113 for "illegal aliens" over the past five years.

Larkin, I agree with your a... (Below threshold)

Larkin, I agree with your assessment of how Romney should respond to it -- but as to your question "why is this a smear," it is one of those typical faux-revelation stories that, when you dispassionately read the facts, you ask "what is the big deal," but it is written in such a way as to cast a false light. They know that most readers are not so analytical as to question the foundation of the story. It is written to lead the reader to ask "shouldn't he have known," and to conclude "he is just like those two Clinton people who were disgraced for the SAME THING."

Hey "pucker puss" (lee lee)... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Hey "pucker puss" (lee lee) nice to see that you read my posts and I get under your skin (makes my day-snicker snicker).
"conservative commenters such as this clown"
Get used to it whimp until Jay says for me to cool it. If you had said what that guy did you would have got the same response from me.

At least the Globe didn't d... (Below threshold)
Larkin:

At least the Globe didn't disclose this right before the Iowa caucuses or New Hampshire primary. Clearly, if they wanted to maximize the damage to him they could have.

That doesn't fly, Larkin --... (Below threshold)

That doesn't fly, Larkin -- you think they could get away with sitting on a story fo a year and a half? Even they know that couldn't pass the ha-ha test.

Answer this question, Larkin (and Lee) -- should the Globe also investigate the employees working for all of the subcontractors involved in building Deval Patrick's Berkshires retreat?

If not, why not?

I find it amazing that peop... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

I find it amazing that people who found "racism" in the Corker ad in TN can't see why this story in the Globe is laughable.

Romney didn't hire an illegal. He hired a landscaping company. He doesn't have access to the employment records of companies --- nor does he have the time to peruse them IF he had the access.

Is Romney the ONLY person who uses the company? NOBODY but Mitt does? We know that just ain't happening as, even though I imagine Mitt is a solid tipper, one job alone isn't enough to keep you afloat.

BTW, nogo, MTV didn't reveal what underwear Clinton wore. Clinton did. He answered the question.

How quick they forget. Two years ago the Globe did story after story whacking Kerry.

How about a link to said story?
-=Mike
-=Mike

I love coming back to a pos... (Below threshold)

I love coming back to a post days later to see the last straggling comments. It wasn't until the bottom of page two that they mentioned this company even having other clients. And if anyone thinks this story is simply to highlight the illegal alien problem, consider that Romney was referred to "by name" 30 times in the article.

As to whether or not Romney responded "defensively", all we see is this:
"Asked by a reporter yesterday about his use of Community Lawn Service with a Heart, Romney, who was hosting the Republican Governors Association conference in Miami, said, "Aw, geez," and walked away." Unless we know how or what the reporter asked him, "Aw geez," cannot be construed as 'defensive'.

Oh, but they're only concerned about the illegal alien problem, right? Not once mentioning that had Romney asked the company's owner, he likely would have lied just as he did to the reporter. And if Romney inquired of each worker he might have been accused of profiling. There are cities in this country where even the cops can't ask about someone's legal status.

The only argument that can be made is that Romney might have reported his suspicions to the proper authorities who could then investigate.

While I have no idea whether the Globe did 'story after story' against Kerry, (I'm not going to spend my Sunday morning proving what someone else says) they indeed ended up practically slobbering all over him just before the elections to glowingly endorse him and Edwards for the Presidency.

Will they turn around and endorse Mitt for the Presidency in '08? This: "The experience of the workers on Romney's property seems far removed from the political rhetoric." Doesn't sound too promising.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy