Immigrant funds flow to Cannon campaign Pro-migrant groups have donated $58,200 in the past 12 days
Deseret Morning News By Bob Bernick Jr. and Lee Davidson Deseret Morning News June 21, 2006
Just days before his Republican primary election, U.S. Rep. Chris Cannon is seeing more than $134,000 flowing into his war chest, much of it from organizations known to favor cheap immigrant labor.
The pro-immigration groups have given Cannon, R-Utah, at least $58,200 in the past 12 days alone, a review of federal campaign reports shows.
That includes at least $30,000 from agricultural interests — such as the California Farm Bureau and the Dairy Farmers of America.
Additional money is coming from businesses known for hiring inexpensive labor —including Wal-Mart and the National Roofing Contractors Association.
Illegal immigration has been the top topic in the race, with GOP challenger John Jacob saying a "perfect storm" is building in his candidacy and he believes he has a real shot at unseating the five-term congressman.
Jacob says Cannon is out of step with how 3rd District Republicans stand on illegal immigration.
Apparently some Washington, D.C., politicos see the same storm clouds as Cannon, who has never been one of the bigger fund-raisers.
Tens of thousands of dollars have been pouring late into his campaign, fueling TV and radio ads before Tuesday's primary.
The money is welcome, said Nathan Rathbun, Cannon's campaign manager, and some of it is flowing in because the national debate on immigration reform has shone a spotlight on the Cannon/Jacob race.
A Deseret Morning News review of the 48-hour notice contributions — filings coming into a campaign since the June 15 pre-primary report — shows Cannon has raised $134,750 in the past 12 days. That's 20 percent of all of his money raised since his 2004 re-election.
"Yes, these PACs have figured out where Chris stands" on illegal immigration, Jacob said Tuesday. Jacob and anti-illegal immigration groups say Cannon supports guest-worker programs and amnesty — a charge that Cannon denies.
"These contributions make it very clear that Cannon supports cheap, often illegal, immigrant labor," Jacob said. "But he's trying to tell the voter that he's tough on illegal immigration. The PACs are saying, 'We know where you are, and here's your money.' " Some of the PACs have given to Cannon previously, Rathbun said, adding that the campaign held a Washington, D.C., fund-raiser attended by some groups "that support reasonable immigration reform."
The National Roofing Contractors Association gave $5,000 to Cannon on June 15 at that fund-raiser, organized by the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, said Craig Brightup, NRCA vice president of government relations.
46 "We support a rational, reasonable, comprehensive approach to immigration reform," Brightup said. The NRCA supports a reasonable guest-worker program that lets illegal immigrants "have a pathway to come above ground" in the country, Brightup said, adding that Cannon has "been attacked with demagoguery" on the illegal immigration issue.
Rathbun said some recent donors are giving because they oppose "the tactics of Team America," an anti-illegal immigration PAC that is running radio ads against Cannon in Utah. "But some of these PACs I've never heard of," he said.
Jacob, a millionaire who has basically self-funded his campaign, said he may or may not run TV ads over the next several days. His radio ads have been running for several weeks. "I don't have the $50,000 coming in from these PACs," he said. E-mail: bbjr@desnews.com; lee@desnews.com 47
In other words, you have a bunch of law breaking companies providing money so that they and the illegal aliens they hired don't get punished. Surprise! Surprise!
Now, what would really be interesting is if grassroots supporters of illegal immigration had done this. That would imply popular support. As it is, it's the same old same old.
Cannon is flooding the radio and Tv air waves with adds....Cannon already leads in the polls and with this extra funding and dozens of new ads attacking jocaob as an extreme white supremacy bigot, we should win this.
I must admit, this one is VERY HUGE..
To all my migrants brothers and sisters, if jacob wins this, then this one will be a huge set back, but cannon has a good lead right now, althought jacob had gain some support...
THIS ONE IS FOR ALL OF US HARD WORKING IMMIGRANTS...WALL MART, AND ALL THE BUSINESSES SHOULD DONATE EVERYTHING TO CANNON, BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE IT COULD START AND END FOR US.
[quote], a millionaire who has basically self-funded his campaign, said he may or may not run TV ads over the next several days. His radio ads have been running for several weeks. "I don't have the $50,000 coming in from these PACs," he said.[/quote]
All major company should all fund to cannon if they dont want to have to shut down their door because they cant find workers....I mean everyone should get in there and no business should fund to jacob...let him cry and let him go bankrupt by using all his money then lose, that would be sweet.
I REPEAT, ALL BUSINESSES ALL OVER AMERICA SHOULD SENT CANNON A CHECK OF AT LEAST $2000..THIS MONEY IS NOTHING CONSIDERING THAT IF JACOB ENFORCEMENT-ONLY PASSES, THEN TTHEIR BUSINESSES WILL GO BANKRUPT BECAUSE OF LACK OF WORKERS.
more BS from jean the illegal....obviously her cable tv service must be out since she is cutting and pasting anti-patriotic propaganda regarding illegal alien dirtbags (like herself) and those fools who support selling out America to scum.
tHE LATEST POLLS IVE SEEN SEEM TO ALL SUGGEST THAT CANNON HAVE A 15 % LEAD...LETS KEEP THIS UP GUYS..WE NEED MORE MONEY FROM WAL MART, THE CALIFORNIA AG JOBS, AND MANY OTHERS...COME ON GUYS, WE DONT WANT TO JUST WIN BY 10, WE WANT TO CRUSH JACOB....
Poor babies. Their businesses will do just fine--they'll just have to pay more to find people willing to do this very dangerous and dirty work. They'll pass costs on to consumers, and the consumers who actually buy these products will pay a little more for meat or lettuce, or whatever, rather than all of us getting stuck with supporting the illegals in our communities. Assuming of course that they're not just pocketing the higher profits from using illegals already.
Unlike you aliba, those businesses arent stupid...They know that they will must likely loose their best and hardest workers so they understand that jacobs cant win under any circumstances..those businesses knows that the instant the enforcement-only law kicks in, they are done and instead of paying a worker $9 for picking lettuce, they will have to pay this worker $20..
This might be great for the worker to get 20 instead of 9, but this could kill the company and eleiminate jobs because of the wages being so high.
So, therefore, those businesses have no choice but to flood cannon's pocket because he at least has a plan that would allow them to enlarge their pool of worker willing to work under very disturbing hot weather etc etc.
Jean--Even if Cannon wins the primary, he still faces the election in the fall. His own party is split on this issue. Do you think the people who are voting for Jacob are going to vote for Cannon in the fall? Cannon's feet will get held to the fire on amnesty past the fall election, if only to placate Republicans who oppose amnesty.
And Jean, the fact that business so blatantly wants amnesty is likely to work against it with many voters. In the meantime, Republicans who support amnesty are seeing what it is literally going to cost them to hold onto their seats, if they support amnesty. And remember, Utah is generally a "pro-immigrant" state.
Fallacy: Straw Man --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Straw Man
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:
Examples of Straw Man
Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000." Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?" Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it." Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead." Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones."
A straw man argument is a rhetorical technique based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact misleading, since the argument actually presented by the opponent has not been refuted.
Its name is derived from the use of straw men in combat training (see [1]). It is occasionally called a straw dog fallacy [2] or a scarecrow argument.
Setup of a straw-man One can set up a straw man in the following ways:
Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated. Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical. Some logic textbooks define the straw man fallacy only as a misrepresented argument. It is now common, however, to use the term to refer to all of these tactics. The straw-man technique is also used as a form of media manipulation.
However, carefully presenting and refuting a weakened form of an opponent's argument is not always itself a fallacy. Instead, it restricts the scope of the opponent's argument, either to where the argument is no longer relevant or as a step of a proof by exhaustion.
As a rhetorical term, "straw man" describes a point of view that was created in order to be easily defeated in argument; the creator of a "straw man" argument does not accurately reflect the best arguments of his or her opponents, but instead sidesteps or mischaracterizes them so as to make the opposing view appear weak or ridiculous. An example of this is when person A says "I don't think children should run into the busy streets". Person B will say "I think that it would be foolish to lock up children all day with no fresh air". This insinuates that person A's argument is far more draconian than it is.
From online sources.
Posts: 2501 | Location: NJ, USA | Registered: 03-11-2006
Im not so big about cannon, but i need him to win his primary because i know his opponent is likely to take a moderate stance on immigration...Would team america endorse a democrats?...but as you and i knows it, democrats immigrations views are moderate and eventhought i havent checked the democratic opponent of cannon, i would be shock if he take an extreme view just like jacob...And even if hes thinking about it, he will back away when he sees big companies backing cannon because jacobs wants to kil their businesses.
If the democratic opponents take the same lane as jacobs ONCE jacob is defeated, then those big companies will again support cannon.
WE WILL SEE THIS TREAND NATIONWIDE....DONT EXPECT BRYAN BILBRAY TO GET ANY FUNDING IN NOVEMBER...GET YOUR OWN MONEY...NO EXTREME BIGOTS WILL GET ANY MONEY FOR BIG BUSINESSES, SO THEY BETTER BE MILLIONAIR LIKE JACOB.
Believe me, a bill will pass whether you like it or not...the only problem is because it is an elction year, lawmakers are reluctant to do so because of how diversive the subject is.
I dont think extremist can kill immigration just because they think there is too much mexican in america..This is xenophobic talks and you cant allow people like that run the US...Their argument is based on race and this should never be a reason to kill immigration.
jacob will lose to cannon and pro immigration group should trumpet cannon victory just like they trumpeted bilbray victory..
THIS WILL ALSO TELL ALL LAWMAKERS THAT WILL RUN ON ANTI IMMIGRATION IS THAT THEY WILL ALSO RUN AGAINST BIG BUSINESSES...SO PREPARE FOR CUT BACK IN FUNDS TO ANY LAWMAKERS THAT RUNS ON THIS EXTREME IMMIGRATION PLATE....AFTER JACOB FALLS, IT WOULD BE GREAT
Demagogy (from the Greek: demos "people", and agogos "leading") refers to a political strategy for obtaining and gaining political power by appealing to the popular prejudices, fears, and expectations of the public —typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalistic or populist themes.
The term is commonly used as a political pejorative: —political opponents are described as "demagogues," while politicians approved of are "men of the people," or "statesmen."
The early 20th century American social critic and humorist H. L. Mencken, known for his "definitions" of terms, defined a "demagogue" as:
"One who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." Though this definition emphasizes the use of lying and falshoods, some point out that demagogy does not require such, but that skilled demogogues often need use only special emphasis by which an uncritical listener will be led to draw the desired conclusion himself, seeding a belief that is self-reinforced rather than one based on fact or truth. Demagogues may make use of logical fallacies, though persuasion may require no use of logic. While it may not rely heavily upon outright lies, the use of half-truths, omissions, and distortions are what define demagogy —it is in essence giving bad-faith arguments for the purpose of political gain.
Another famous usage was by the aging Erich Ludendorff, who after being a strong supporter of the early rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany, after learning of Hitler's appointment as Chancellor, expressed his disappointment to (the very old) German President Paul von Hindenburg:
"By appointing Hitler Chancellor of the Reich, you have handed over our sacred German Fatherland to one of the greatest demagogues of all time. I prophesy to you this evil man will plunge our Reich into the abyss and will inflict immeasurable woe on our nation. Future generations will curse you in your grave for this action." Hitler indeed would become regarded as perhaps the definition of a demagogue, having successfully risen to power through appeals to the ethnic and nationalistic prejudices and vanities of the German people —exploting a political base of embittered and misled war veterans and nationalists and directing blame at minority and other convenient scapegoats ("Dolchstosslegende"). Hitler further consolidated his power through means of fear and intimidation, and targeted killing of German political dissidents and intellectuals ("Gleichschaltung").
Methods not involving violations of logic Apples and oranges - mixing of incomparable quantities. For example, "our government has increased social spending by 5 billion dollars, while the previous government has increased it only by 0.4 percent." Obviously, the latter sounds like less, but one cannot be sure without an absolute value.
Half truth - For example, "the opposition have accused us of cutting foreign aid, actually our government has increased foreign aid by 500 million dollars." Not mentioning that ajusted for inflation the allocate funds have in fact gone down.
False authority - relying on the general authority of a person who is not proficient in the discussed topic. Example: "the professor read my book, and liked it very much". The fact that it was a professor of chemistry who read a book on anthropology is omitted.
Methods involving violation of logic For or against - assuming that there are only two possible opinions on a given topic. Example: "Smith is not with us, therefore he is against us". The possibility of a neutral position or divergence is ignored.
Demonization - identifying others as a mortal threat. Often this involves scapegoating--blaming others for one's own problems. This is often advanced by using vague terms to identify the opposition group and then stereotyping that group. This allows the demagogue to exaggerate this group's influence and ascribe any trait to them by identifying that trait in any individual in the group. This method can be aided by constructing a false dilemma that portrays opposition groups as having a value system that is the polar opposite of one's own, as opposed to simply having different priorities.
Loaded question - posing a question with an implied position that the opponent does not have.
Arguments unrelated to a discussion: ------------------------------------ Unrelated facts - bringing unrelated facts that sound in favor of the speaker's agenda. Example: "Our beverages do not contain sodium deoxycholate". This is probably true, but the mentioned chemical is a detergent, and should not be contained in any beverage whatsoever.
Emotional appeal or personal attack - an attempt to bring a discussion to an emotional level. For example, "Everyone is against me!", "Can't I be right just once?", "You're stupid!", "You are demagoguing!" or just the classic retort "Shut up!"
------------------------------------------------ But, for those who don't need definitions, I would just call all of this "BS"
All of this thread is BS , nothing but a "Straw Man" argument that serves interests of none but those who share the position of www.fairus.org, and founder of Grandest Nazi Affiliated Demagogue alive in US - Mr. John Tanton.
Thank God, polls have repeatedly shown that majority of American people don't follow their hateful, bigoted, anti-immigrant rhetoric.
God Bless America, land of Brave and Free !
IE
Posts: 2501 | Location: NJ, USA | Registered: 03-11-2006
Add to del.icio.us
