Defection in Liberal-Land; Bonnie Erbe of PBS supports immigration restriction, says I certainly came of age as a progressive, but I am no longer a progressive because I don’t believe the progressives really support the environment, and to me, that’s the most important issue. If we don’t deal with climate change and human impact on the planet, there’s not going to be a planet in 50 years, it’s my personal belief

http://www.alternet.org/immigration/pbss-bonnie-erbe-accepts-award-anti-immigrant-group

David Neiwert, the anti-white who is linked in the above article, doesn’t understand what Bonnie is actually saying in the below quote. She is is not saying “our” she is saying “r,” as in in the letter “r.” dismissively saying, “pointing and sputtering RACISM! RACISM! is getting old.”

And say that our — that begins with R She was going to say, the r word, in my opinion. She must be listening to James Edwards! That sort of language is in his ad for his book Racism, Schmacism.

We also get great, you know, emails saying, thank you for doing this; I have – I hear this nowhere else on TV. But we also get people who say – you know, call me bad names and say that our – that begins with R – and call us out for just reporting what are the facts.”

So Neiwert is freaking out because this is a major liberal defection to the “racist” LOL immigration restriction right wing! Hahahahaha! PBS no less! I’m surprised David Neiwert has not figured out that Eric Alterman has also defected. Listen to him mock the phrase “we shall overcome.”

That’s a defection right in Moyers’ face, but Moyers is totally in denial, being polite, keeping a straight face when one of his colleagues is saying, “The civil rights movement has jumped the shark” right to his face. Eric Alterman is on the masthead of the commie rag The Nation, too.

I just love to read liberal hand-wringing, don’t you? It makes my day. Here’s the copypasta from alternet:

Southern Poverty Law Center / By David Neiwert [1]
comments_image
PBS’s Bonnie Erbe Accepts Award from Anti-Immigrant Group

June 8, 2014 |
Bonnie Erbe, the longtime host of the Public Broadcasting Service’s “To The Contrary” program, has long been a proponent of dubious claims that immigration depletes natural resources and worsens global warming, as well as an apologist for the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies (CIS). So it was not really a surprise when CIS awarded Erbe [2] its annual journalism prize this year for her “reporting on immigration’s effects on health care, poverty, and natural resources, as well as on birth tourism.”

Erbe, who was given the award Tuesday at a gathering at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., told the audience in her acceptance speech that she “no longer” considers herself a progressive, “because I don’t believe the progressives really support the environment.”

Erbe’s speech explicitly acknowledged the coordination of anti-immigrant activism among various organizations associated with CIS, including the “greenwashing” group Progressives For Immigration Reform [3] (PFIR), and Numbers USA [4], which along with CIS and another nativist outfit, the Federation for American Immigration Reform [5], are all part of a network [6] devoted to opposing immigration.

Erbe acknowledged that she works closely with CIS and Numbers USA, and openly accepts their frequently dubious studies as accurate: “We work with them on many projects,” she said, praising them for their growing influence, “shown by the growth of their website and email list they run a very necessary organization with now more than 2 million, I believe.”

She explained her thinking on immigration, saying she doesn’t have a problem with immigrants as people, but as a mass phenomenon: “Anyway, immigrants are fabulous. Immigrants make the best Americans. They work the hardest for the least amount of money. They contribute so much to this country,” she said. “But in the journalistic community, if you dare raise any negative impact of mass immigration that we have now, both legal and illegal, you are shunted aside as some kind of strange person who has – you know, has a very strange approach to reporting.”

Erbe said she became concerned about immigration mostly as an environmental issue, and came to part ways with liberals over the issue of overpopulation, “because they support open-border immigration, pretty much.”

“I certainly came of age as a progressive, but I am no longer a progressive because I don’t believe the progressives really support the environment, and to me, that’s the most important issue. If we don’t deal with climate change and human impact on the planet, there’s not going to be a planet in 50 years, it’s my personal belief,” she said. “And you can’t – you say that in journalistic or political circles, and people look at you cross-eyed. And some – and we get objections from viewers sometimes. We also get great, you know, emails saying, thank you for doing this; I have – I hear this nowhere else on TV. But we also get people who say – you know, call me bad names and say that our – that begins with R – and call us out for just reporting what are the facts.”

Those facts, as Erbe sees it:

We’re not dealing with the fact that we are the major contributors to greenhouse gases and what we do – and this is our cultural disadvantage, but when we do take immigrants from developing nations who have very small carbon footprints, we turn them into the rest of us, who have huge carbon footprints, and turn them into greater contributors to global warming.

And we need to do something somewhere. We’re not doing anything on any of the fronts. Immigration is just one of the fronts where we need to start controlling thing – things, but again, is anybody going to listen? Does anybody care? No.

This is not particularly new for Erbe. In the past [7], she has both praised CIS and its “studies”, and has ardently promoted the view (also long promoted by FAIR and CIS’s founder, John Tanton [8]) that immigration causes environmental degradation in the United States. Indeed, much of Tanton’s work has entailed attempts to transform immigration into an environmental issue.

And Erbe noted at the end of her speech that she was donating the proceeds from her award to PFIR,whose main purpose as a “greenwashing” outfit [3] is to argue against immigration on environmental grounds. Erbe appears to have bought into their claims whole.

The claim, for instance, that immigrants worsen carbon emissions, as ThinkProgress has explained [9], is based almost entirely on CIS studies that employ “deeply flawed methodology”:

The report claims that a person’s CO2 emissions is directly related to his or her personal income — so a person making $110,000 per year will emit 10 percent more carbon than a person who earns $100,000 per year under the report’s methodology. Thus, because the report claims that each Mexican immigrant earns 53.2 percent of the average U.S. resident, it claims that these immigrants must also produce 53.2 percent of the carbon emissions.

But this is simply absurd. If such a relationship actually did exist, that would mean that Mitt Romney, who earned $21.6 million in 2010 — or more than 600 times the average annual income according to the CIS report — also must have produced 600 times the CO2 emissions. That’s enough of a carbon footprint to fuel over 2,200 vehicles or power more than 1,400 homes for an entire year. Not even John McCain owns that many houses.

Think Progress also notes that data actually demonstrates that immigrants produce lower carbon emissions than their native-born citizen counterparts. “And as CAP Senior Fellow Andrew Light told ThinkProgress, even if we could suddenly remove the entire carbon impact created by immigrants, it would only decrease the U.S.’s carbon emissions by 7.32 percent in a good year. Clearly, immigrants are not to blame for the U.S.’s large climate footprint.”

Of course, that has not stopped CIS and its nativist cohorts from pointing the finger of blame, nor has it stopped Erbe from blithely aiding in that process. These views were adroitly satirized by Stephen Colbert [10] a couple of years ago.

“I say, why stop with global warming?” he asked in a segment on the CIS claims. “There are so many problems on which conservatives and liberals can come together to blame immigrants. … So, liberals, conservatives, let’s make sure America continues to be a country people strive to come to, by kicking out the people who came here.”

Advertisements

About mindweapon

A mind weapon riding along with Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.https://en.gravatar.com/profiles/edit/#
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Defection in Liberal-Land; Bonnie Erbe of PBS supports immigration restriction, says I certainly came of age as a progressive, but I am no longer a progressive because I don’t believe the progressives really support the environment, and to me, that’s the most important issue. If we don’t deal with climate change and human impact on the planet, there’s not going to be a planet in 50 years, it’s my personal belief

  1. brierrabbit3030 says:

    This is the reason, why, though I share some values with enviromentalists, I never take them seriously. It doesnt do any good to fiddle with the edges of trying to save species, water resources, forests, etc, when any results just get swamped by a few million more bodies that need space and resources to survive. Yosemite in California will just be a neihborhood park one day because of this. The Western half of the country is already straining under inadequate water supplies. I suspect over time more enviromentalists are going to try to slowly wiggle out from under the suffocating pro immigration stand the the Diversity Cult insists on. It will soon reach the point whether they want more “Cultural Enrichment”, or salmon in the streams, and condors in the air, and ladyslipper orchids in the woods. Another point that must be made, and enviromentalists know this too, is that all these people coming from the third world, have no connection, or desire to care about national parks, and wild places in a country when they come for freebies, and money to send home. Blacks have been here hundreds of years, and THEY dont go to national parks much at all. You think immigrants with no connection, or ancestry in Americas past are going to care about a place like Gettysburg? It means nothing to them. This I feel, is where some of the first cracks on the Diversity Left will begin to happen. Enviromentalists really don’t want to end up like India, where you are constantly watching the Wild die, simply because too many people have to struggle for resources and space.

  2. countenance says:

    1. The power of the immigration issue.

    2. I am of the opinion that there are no true environmentalists today, “environmentalist” properly understood. What passes for the enviro movement is a bunch of people hiding some ulterior and almost always irrelevant and non-enviro and usually selfish agenda behind a green wall, and lots of times, it has to do with rich leftists trying to protect themselves from the diversity they want to inflict on the rest of us.

    3. That said, the enviro issue is still not as good an argument for ethnonationalism as is just pure straight up out and outright ethnonationalism is for itself.

  3. Stary Wylk says:

    Many of us bought in to Zero Population Growth because we wanted our children to be able to live as spaciously as we did. That was 100,000,000 people ago.

  4. fnn says:

    Not a single fatality resulted from all those white protests against housing desegregation in Chicago that Alterman talks about starting at 4:42. The South Deering-Trumbull Park neighborhood on the South Side,for example, had highly skilled bombmakers who learned their trade in WWII and Korea. That particular low-intensity war against desegregation took place in the 1950s. Today that kind of activity would draw hundreds of FBI and ATF agents to the area-back then it was all handled by the Chicago Police.

    USG therapeutic state is almost the same as EU:
    http://galliawatch.blogspot.com/2014/06/reform-not-possible.html#links

    “For a long time, we tried to improve the functioning of the European Union, hoping to bring the institution back to reason and to a greater respect for national identities. What we wanted to construct was a Europe of nations. Today our criticism of the institution is much more radical because we see, with regret, that it is not reformable. The hugeness of its appetite, both in terms of space and powers – it wants to manage everything from the social realm to the cultural, including politics and sexuality! – is staggering. And surprising, because one cannot help but perceive the stinging failures it has sustained, as much in its political decisions as in economic and family matters, etc…”

  5. Anon says:

    “And as CAP Senior Fellow Andrew Light told ThinkProgress, even if we could suddenly remove the entire carbon impact created by immigrants, it would only decrease the U.S.’s carbon emissions by 7.32 percent in a good year. Clearly, immigrants are not to blame for the U.S.’s large climate footprint.” – And how much of our future carbon footprint?

    • KO says:

      What about the footprint of everyone that’s come here since 1970, and their children and grandchildren, not to mention their parents and grandparents?

  6. ben tillman says:

    The report claims that a person’s CO2 emissions is directly related to his or her personal income — so a person making $110,000 per year will emit 10 percent more carbon than a person who earns $100,000 per year under the report’s methodology. Thus, because the report claims that each Mexican immigrant earns 53.2 percent of the average U.S. resident, it claims that these immigrants must also produce 53.2 percent of the carbon emissions.

    But this is simply absurd. If such a relationship actually did exist, that would mean that Mitt Romney, who earned $21.6 million in 2010 — or more than 600 times the average annual income according to the CIS report — also must have produced 600 times the CO2 emissions. That’s enough of a carbon footprint to fuel over 2,200 vehicles or power more than 1,400 homes for an entire year. Not even John McCain owns that many houses.

    Think Progress also notes that data actually demonstrates that immigrants produce lower carbon emissions than their native-born citizen counterparts.

    Is Neiwert retarded or what? He just told us that his enemies at CIS concede that that immigrants produce far lower carbon emissions than the US average — you know, 46.8% less (or 53.2% as much). And the Romney argument is an argument against his position since it points out that people’s carbon footprints cluster more tightly around the mean. And, this is to be expected since we know that people with no income have a carbon footprint.

  7. Attila says:

    I think that was probably a dishonest answer. She may have suddenly realized that she doesn’t want HER daughter to marry black.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s