Mediaboss Marketing

For years, Republican opposition to immigration reform has exacted a steep political cost, the enmity of Latino voters.

But now some are pivoting to a less perilousargument for their opposition to reordering the nations immigration laws: Its not about keeping out Latinos. Its about keeping out Islamic State terrorists.

Georgia Senate candidate David Perdue laces into his Democratic opponent Michelle Nunn in a new ad:

Shes for amnesty while terrorism experts say our border breakdown could provide an entry for groups like ISIS, the ad says, referring to the Islamic State militant group, which was targeted by U.S. airstrikes in Syria on Tuesday.

If a country cant protect its borders, what can it protect? Perdue asks as he looks into the camera. To me the answer is crystal clear: Actually secure our borders, enforce our existing laws and, once and for all, forget amnesty.

Scott Brown, the former Massachusetts senator now running in New Hampshire against Democratic incumbent Jeanne Shaheen for her Senate seat, echoed the theme in a new ad of his own.

Radical Islamic terrorists are threatening to cause the collapse of our country, he says.

President Obama and Sen. Shaheen seem confused about the nature of the threat. Not me. I want to secure the border, keep out the people who would do us harm and restore Americas leadership in the world.

To emphasize his point, the ad shows Brown in the Army National Guard uniform in which he served for 35 years before retiring.

Contrary to the suggestions in the ads, national security officials have said they have no evidence of Islamic State plans to attack on American soil, much less their presence at the border. The point of the overseas strikes backed by Obama and members of Congress from both parties has been to destroy their capacity before they pose a threat outside the Middle East. And while there have been concerns raised about American sympathizers, they would already be in this country, not trying to cross illegally.

See the article here:
Islamic State at the border: Fearful new focus of GOP campaign ads

Latino activists across the country pledged another Freedom Summerif President Obama went through on his promised executive action on immigration reform. They promised that they would flood states across the country, knocking on doors and helping Democrats keep the Senate. And they said Obama would be known as the "great emancipator" if he acted.

Well, that argument didn't convince Obama of the political efficacyof taking action before the election, and now a new poll shows that Latinos are, not surprisingly, pretty down on their party when it comes to immigration.

The Pew Research Center poll shows Democratic-leaning Hispanics say theirparty isn't doing a good job on immigration by a 52-45 margin.

These low numbers didn't happen overnight. As with other groups, Obama has seen an erosion of Hispanic support since he was reelected in 2012. Back then, Obama's approval rating among Hispanics was75 percent,according to Gallup. Even as of July 2013, his immigration-specific approval ratingamong Hispanics was 68 percent, according to aWashington Post/ABC News poll.

One year later, some 40 percent of Democratic-leaning Hispanics say he has not been willing enough topush forward with granting legal status to illegal immigrants. And that'snot all Hispanics, we emphasize, but just Democratic-leaning ones.

The White House has made clearthat something will still happen on immigration reform before the holiday season is over. And as happened with the deferred deportations of young illegal immigrants in 2012, any move will energize Latinos and likely reverse some of the downward trend that Obama has faced among Hispanics.

Buttwo years after soundly beating Republicans among Hispanics by 47 points, Obama and the Democrats haven't yet monopolized what amounts to a very important and very fast-growing demographic. And it's quite possible many Democratic-leaning Hispanics simply stay home.

Read the original:
The Fix: Hispanic Democrats are really down on their partys immigration efforts

Future of the First Amendment
Educators and other experts discuss a new Knight Foundation national survey showing that the more students use digital media, the more they defend First Amen...

By: Newseum

See the rest here:
Future of the First Amendment - Video

The U.S. Forest Service has tightened restrictions on media coverage in vast swaths of the country's wild lands, requiring reporters to pay for a permit and get permission before shooting a photo or video in federally designated wilderness areas.

Under rules being finalized in November, a reporter who met a biologist, wildlife advocate or whistleblower alleging neglect in any of the nation's 100 million acres of wilderness would first need special approval to shoot photos or videos even on an iPhone.

Permits cost up to $1,500, says Forest Service spokesman Larry Chambers, and reporters who don't get a permit could face fines up to $1,000.

First Amendment advocates say the rules ignore press freedoms and are so vague they'd allow the Forest Service to grant permits only to favored reporters shooting videos for positive stories.

"It's pretty clearly unconstitutional," said Gregg Leslie, legal defense director at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Alexandria, Va. "They would have to show an important need to justify these limits, and they just can't."

Liz Close, the Forest Service's acting wilderness director, says the restrictions have been in place on a temporary basis for four years and are meant to preserve the untamed character of the country's wilderness.

Close didn't cite any real-life examples of why the policy is needed or what problems it's addressing. She didn't know whether any media outlets had applied for permits in the last four years.

She said the agency was implementing the Wilderness Act of 1964, which aims to protect wilderness areas from being exploited for commercial gain.

"It's not a problem, it's a responsibility," she said. "We have to follow the statutory requirements."

The Forest Service's previous rules caused a fuss in 2010, when the agency refused to allow an Idaho Public Television crew into a wilderness area to film student conservation workers. The agency ultimately caved to pressure from Idaho Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter.

Continue reading here:
Forest Service says media needs photography permit in wilderness areas, alarming First Amendment advocates

Hillary CLINTON 14 sept 2014 in Iowa

By: PhetnalyParis

Read the original:
Hillary CLINTON 14 sept 2014 in Iowa - Video