Telemundo Vs. The GOP

A lot has been said about the recent GOP debate held in the Reagan Library last Wednesday (Sept. 7th)… who performed the best, who was the weakest, whether the moderators were biased or not, how truthful the participants were being, etc.

What I’m not seeing being discussed concerns a brief segment about halfway through the debate: the moment when the Spanish-language television station “Telemundo’s” Jose Diaz-Balart walked onto the stage and after invoking Ronald Reagan’s name and how the immigration reform was “so dear to him”, began questioning the candidates about what should be done about illegal immigration, particularly how those who were already here illegally should be treated.

Let’s put aside for now that while Reagan did grant amnesty to roughly 3 million illegal aliens that met certain criteria back in ’86 (Simpson-Mazzoli Bill), it was done so with the understanding that the border would be enforced and that businesses would be faced with penalties and fines for hiring illegals… neither of which was actually done.

If you had watched the debate, you couldn’t help but notice that Mr. Diaz-Balart, rather than asking his questions from the front row of the audience, or even standing by the moderators, walked right onto the stage, and stood in front of each candidate’s podium as they answered the questions.

This strikes me as extremely aggressive, in-your-face posturing on his part, as if he was trying to make a point.

So, the burning question on my mind is… what exactly was Mr. Diaz-Balart’s purpose for attending the debate?

Spanish-language television like “Telemundo” cater almost exclusively to Latinos, many of who never bothered to learn English (and why not, since they have several Spanish-only stations to choose from nowadays?), who overwhelmingly vote for Democratic candidates. Most of them voted for, and continue to support President Barack Obama.

So knowing all this, why send someone who represents the Latino community, who generally not only favor Democrats, but amnesty for illegals as well, to a debate where the candidates have views the exact opposite of their own? What could they possibly hope to gain?

The only logical conclusion I have is that Mr. Diaz-Balart was fishing for sound bites that could be used to inflame the passions of his viewers, or simply to make the GOP candidates look uncompassionate towards their compatriots.

A viewer would watch that segment of the debate (translated into Spanish, of course), marvel at Mr. Daiz-Balart’s “courage” for entering “enemy territory”, standing right in front of those evil gringos, and confronting them face to face about the plight of all those poor immigrants who just want to make better lives for themselves.

If you can come up with a better explanation, you’re welcome to share it, but until then, I don’t see what else it could possibly be.

Links:

Transcript of the Republican Debate at the Reagan Library: (topic of this column begins on page 14) The New York Times online, 09/07/2011


People also view

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *