Earlier today, I wrote about an article in the LA Times that misrepresented the content of the new Arizona immigration statute. Now I see that Dana Milbank has published a piece in the Washington Post that also mischaracterizes the statue. I wonder, was the some sort of talking points given out by the DNC to its favorite columnists to plan a coordinated race baiting attack in hopes of firing up Hispanic voters? In any event, I sent the following e-mail to Milbank. I will report if there is any response.
Dear Mr. Milbank
I read your piece about Obama dropping the push for immigration reform and I was surprised to see your reference to Arizona’a “racial profiling plan”. I respect your intellect, so I assume that you have not bothered to read the new statute. On the other hand, I have read it. It is nothing like a racial profiling plan. Quite the contrary, it is essentially a rehash of the federal policies on immigration. In other words, the state police will have no more right to stop people than INS already has. The main difference is that the state police may actually enforce the law.
It is damaging to this country for you to write race baiting words like “racial profiling plan” when they have no basis in fact. While this may help your political agenda, I would ask that you reconsider the use of racially incendiary words. We all have worked too long and too hard to achieve racial equality in this country (or close to it) to see new wedges driven between groups on the basis of hysteria and misinformation.
And before you tell me that I am wrong, you should know that I am a Harvard educated lawyer with 35 years experience. I read the law. I know what it says. And – most important – I know what it does not say. You are just wrong.
Please reconsider your actions.
No comments:
Post a Comment