Selective News and Selective Enforcement
One of the problems with the mainstream corporate media is that they lie. Sometimes, they lie directly, but more often, it is just their choice of what stories to emphasize. It often is a lie of omission rather than a lie of commission.
Typically, they pick those stories that correspond to the current narrative being promoted by the Democratic Party. For example, CNN and MSNBC were largely silent with the coverage of the recent Jussie Smollett trial. They hardly ever run a story important to those of us in Arizona, such as the literal invasion of the state by illegal aliens.
However, they give breathless nonstop coverage to the January 6th Capitol riot, while ignoring the hundreds of riots perpetrated by Black Lives Matter. And it is true of local media as well. Seen any stories of late of what was the final disposition of those arrested for the riots in Scottsdale about a year ago?
Likewise, if any number of Asian women are pummeled by both black men and women, it’s a non-story. However, if a black is assaulted by a white, especially a police officer, you will never hear the end to it.
It is not clear if this kind of bias is just built into media or not. Clearly, Fox News has stories they prefer to run with as well so you could argue that it is. But since the dominant media (TV networks, all but one of the cable networks, the sports networks, popular magazines, metropolitan newspapers, women’s magazines) are mostly Progressive in outlook, likely it is simply built in to the Progressive mind. They see what they want to see, and without balance in the media, there is no one to tell them they are narrow-minded. Further, they want to see what advances their ideas for political change.
However, no one wants to talk about one of the obvious spin-offs of the Progressive Democrat plan to open our borders to a mass invasion. Not only are they selective about stories, but they are also selective as to what laws they will enforce.
The laws presently on the books prohibit what we are seeing. There is a legal process that you are supposed to go through to enter this country. Yet the Administration just chooses to ignore enforcing the law, and the mainstream corporate media is just fine in ignoring the problem. It is selective law enforcement coupled with selective non-coverage of a major news story.
Selective enforcement of the law IS a big story. A very big story. It means the law is no longer being equally enforced. But the law is the cement that holds civilization together. It means politicians, rather than changing the law in a democratic and open process, can effectively change the law by themselves, simply but not enforcing laws they don’t like. It is hard to imagine anything more destructive to the rule of law and the democratic process than selective enforcement.
Then just to put on the finishing touch, the Progressive wants those that came illegally into the country to get the right to vote. This effectively cancels out the votes of citizens that have helped build the country, raised children, served in the military, and paid hefty taxes. If they cancel out your vote, what is the difference in the outcome than preventing you from voting?
Since illegals from other countries are now able to vote in New York City, and borders are invisible, why not let foreigners that live in other countries vote in our elections as well? It seems logical that once you allow illegals to vote, there is no self-limiting principle available.
And since New York City has a lot of population, New York state is pivotal in national elections. That means illegals could influence a national election. What goes down in New York City does not stay in New York City.
But let’s bring the problem of illegal immigration closer to home, back to Arizona. Just one of the problems involved in mass illegal immigration is turning the Sonoran Desert into a garbage dump. I can’t recall any national or even local environmental group mentioning this as a problem. Nor has Mark Kelly or Krysten Sinema said anything. Or the mayor of Tucson?
Both Tucson and Bisbee in recent years had ordinances against the single-use plastic bag, and it took an act of the Arizona legislature to get them to back off. You would think the sensitive people in Southern Arizona would be more concerned about what is happening around the border, insofar as environmental degradation. An occasional plastic bag is a threat to the desert but the wholesale trashing of the desert by thousands of illegal aliens is just fine with them. That is just a tad selective, is it not?
Now, in the scale of what is important, this likely does not rank with the destruction of the rule of law. On the other hand, it is something one can actually see.
This recently came to mind when a friend in Southern Arizona sent me some photos of the beautiful Sonoran Desert near Tucson. Whether he took them or retrieved them from the internet, doesn’t matter. What it shows is what matters.
We are often told how sensitive the desert is. With the lack of rain, things grow very slowly. There is plenty of outrage if a developer were to defile the desert. Heaven forbid if one were able to permit a copper mine in less than 10 years. There is even outrage from environmentalists if one departs from an approved hiking trail. To do so is to “bust the crust”, which is a sinful act that is disturbing micro-organisms.
Look at the photo above. How does “busting the crust” compare with this? Mark Kelly, are you there?
As mentioned before, this kind of destruction of the desert while important is not as important as the destruction heaped on the law by selective enforcement. However, it does present a powerful visual of what selective enforcement and selective news coverage look like.
