and I actually saw her get frustrated with a guest for the first time. She's interviewing Dan Stein the president of FAIR, the group that apparently wrote the Arizona law. Rachel, as she tends to do approached him with different facts about people that are involved with the company, including one of the founders who has stated basically that White People need to remain the majority.
First off, Mr. Stein came off as a sanctimonious asshole. I don't like to call names, but this guy was so busy attacking Rachel for asking about the people that are involved in his organization that he failed to make his organization look good in my opinion. Instead of getting all defensive and talking over her, he should have answered the questions. To me, the interview that just concluded as I was writing this paragraph is illustrative of what happens when you really ask those people questions and refuse to back down.
If you don't think what she is saying is relevant to your organization, the best way to handle the situation is to answer the question and try to move on. Not to try to play to the middle and be all "can't we all just get along" when there are some people who are apparently blatantly racist in your organization. When she presents you with statements that are part of the public record about someone who is on your board of directors (this isn't some lower level member here) you can't just brush them off because they were made 25 years ago. I went to the FAIR website, and it turns out that organization was formed only 31 years ago. I doubt this founder's opinion changed drastically in 6 years.
If you didn't see the interview, I encourage you to check out the replay around 11:20 (I think the interview started around 9:20). I commend Rachel for maintaining as much of her cool as she did while this guy was calling her a liar and refusing to answer her questions in favor of attacking her instead.
Update [2010-4-29 22:4:52 by Muzikal203]: Rachel is on top of it. LOL, she just told us to check out the info she has on the org which is portrayed as mainstream even when it isn't on her blog. Link here. Here's a taste:
FAIR was founded in 1979 by John Tanton, who's still listed as a member of FAIR's board of directors. Seven years after he started FAIR, Tanton wrote this, "To govern is to populate. Will the present majority peaceably hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile? As whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night or will there be an explosion?"
For nine of the first years of FAIR's existence, the group reportedly received more than $1 million in funding from something called the Pioneer Fund. The Pioneer Fund describes itself as based "in the Darwinian-Galtonian evolutionary tradition and eugenics movement." For the last 70 years, the Pioneer Fund has funded controversial research about race and intelligence, essentially aimed at proving the racial superiority of white people. The group's original mandate was to promote the genes of those "deemed to be descended predominantly from white persons who settled in the original 13 states prior to the adoption of the Constitution."
[UPDATE #2] here's the segment:
Also, a couple of people have mentioned that they didn't think it was fair for Rachel to do "guilt by association" in the interview. I disagree. When the person she's asking about is the organizations FOUNDER it maters, even when she asked him about stuff he himself said, he wouldn't give a real answer. If you don't think it's relevant fine say so, but what he does in the interview didn't make him look good at all, and Rachel couldn't even get some of her questions out, so we don't really know ~where~ she was going with the questioning. Anywhoo, the vid is up so watch and judge for yourself, and let's keep the party going in the comments people who agree and disagree with me alike :o)
Update [2010-4-30 0:36:1 by Muzikal203]: One last update, they are already fact checking the interview:
On the show tonight, Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, denied giving money to Protect Arizona Now, which was pushing the Prop 200 immigration initiative in 2004. One of PAN's top leaders was Virginia Abernethy, a self-proclaimed "ethnic separatist."
"We never gave that organization dime," Stein told us. "And secondly, even if we were going to give them a dime, we wouldn't have given them a dime with Virginia Abernethy associated with it."
Let's look at FAIR's website, shall we? It refers directly to financial support for Virginia Abernethy's PAN. Here's one instance:
FAIR's Western Regional Field Director Rick Oltman has been working with activists in Arizona to help raise funds and public awareness for the Protect Arizona Now initiative, which would deny most taxpayer funded social services to illegal aliens and tighten voting regulations. They're working to qualify the initiative for the November '04 ballot. Since Arizona has become "ground zero" in the fight against illegal immigration, it's important that this initiative, which enjoys wide public support, get on the ballot.
More at the link.