The networks were exquisitely attuned this spring to the unheard voices of illegal aliens "emerging from the shadows" to protest and demand their "rights." But what about the unheard voices of opponents of illegal immigration?

Linda Greenhouse is a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter who covers the United States Supreme Court for the New York Times. As we all know, the New York Times, along with the rest of the mainstream press, is adamant about their commitment to unbiased journalism. Reporters don't have opinions, at least not opinions that impact their journalism. It's nonsense, of course, but nonsense that's maintained by the likes of the Times.

On Thursday night, for the second time in about two weeks, the CBS Evening News turned over its “freeSpeech” segment to a sympathetic person pleading for the rights of illegal aliens, this time a successful illegal who's done well. (So far, CBS has not run a commentary from anyone advocating a crackdown on illegal aliens.) Identifying him as an “illegal immigrant,” CBS concealed the identity of “Carlos” by using a fake name and putting him in shadow. He explained: “I cannot show you my face tonight because if I were identified I could be deported. After hearing my story, I hope that you will question whether this is what I deserve.” The college-age “Carlos,” whose family came in on a tourist visa when he was eleven and overstayed their visas, asserted: “Almost from the beginning my parents paid taxes, and two years after we arrived here, they applied for legal residency. Believe it or not, our application is still pending. That means my parents and sister and I can still be deported even though we did everything we were supposed to do to try to become legal.” Except follow the rules for their visa.

“Carlos” concluded: “I ended up graduating fifth in my high school class and have since graduated college and I hope to become a lawyer. But because I am undocumented, I could never get a license to practice law and that puts me in a state of limbo. I've grown up here and I feel American -- I just lack the piece of paper that validates it.” (Transcript follows)

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has released its list of media and elected “elitists” who are doing the most to prevent passage of meaningful immigration reform. This “motley crew” of media organizations that promote “unfettered immigration” and are completely out of touch with public opinion include (who else?) the New York Times and the Washington Post…and, even the Wall Street Journal.

The Chronicle today has published a piece titled "Border fences -- and fantasies", that claims that illegal immigration has increased because of the California border fence project (Called operation Vanguard) and calls the larger border fence approved by Congress recently "tomfoolery".

NY Times critic William Grimes reviews Dutch journalist Ian Buruma's "Murder in Amsterdam -- The Death of Theo Van Gogh and the Limits of Tolerance." It's a favorable review of Buruma's warnings of Muslim extremism in The Netherlands that culminated in the murder of documentary filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, but includes this bizarre sentence:

Attendance at Thursday's pro-illegal alien rally fell way below even the latest low-balling protest organizer estimates. In Friday's Washington Post, reporters Darryl Fears and N.C. Aizenman estimated that "fewer than 5,000" attended the festivities yesterday. The first paragraph was a stunner:

Early reports on Thursday's planned Washington march for amnesty for illegal aliens said a million protesters were expected. At the top of the Metro section of Thursday's Washington Post, we learn lowering expectations is under way -- well, not at the top of the story, but in paragraph eighteen: "Organizers initially predicted a turnout of 1 million, but they now are projecting a crowd similar to the one at a rally on the National Mall on April 10.

A night after giving its “freeSpeech” platform over to the liberal Morgan Spurlock to gripe about the lack of “civil discourse,” the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric on Wednesday employed the feature to help plug a Thursday protest in favor of amnesty for illegal immigrants. CBS put a soft and sympathetic edge on the topic by showcasing a Los Angeles Times reporter, Sonia Nazario, concerned about mothers in the U.S. separated from their kids south of the border. Couric set up Nazario by pointing out how, on Thursday in DC, there would be “a demonstration in favor of amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.” The “freeSpeech” segment, Couric explained, would focus “on mothers who come here illegally, and the children they leave behind.”

Nazario began: “If we are going to start to solve our immigration problem and stay true to our family values, we need to understand the plight of hundreds of thousands of mothers now in the U.S. and the children they felt forced to leave behind in Central America. It's a humanitarian crisis.” Nazario is the author of Enrique’s Journey: The Story of a Boy’s Dangerous Odyssey to Reunite with His Mother. (Transcript follows)

It was a rollicking episode of 'The Long & The Short of It' this morning, and even taking my personal biases into account, it was hard not to score it 2-0 for the tall man.

Michelle Malkin provides today’s LOL moment in supposed corporate conservatism. The Chicago Tribune reports that Miller Brewing paying out $30,000 to sponsor an illegal-alien advocacy march from Chicago to Denny Hastert’s office in Batavia. Their motto: “Live responsibly.” (Perhaps that might be contradicted a bit by the illegal immigrating.) What next?

On Thursday night, CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, anchored by Kitty Pilgrim, featured a full story on the MRC's study by Tim Graham released on Monday, “Election In the Streets: How the Broadcast Networks Promote Illegal Immigration.” Pilgrim announced that “this nation's major newscasts are being accused of being blatantly sympathetic to illegal aliens.” Reporter Casey Wian explained how “a study released this week by the conservative Media Research ABC, CBS, and NBC News have been promoting illegal immigration." After a soundbite from Graham, Wian relayed how “the study examined network news coverage of the issue from March 24th through May 31st. Among the findings, illegal alien amnesty advocates appeared in about twice as many soundbites as supporters of border security.” In addition, “networks routinely ignored polls showing the vast majority of Americans favor stronger border security. And the study concluded: 'The networks seemed to offer honorary citizenship to anyone crossing the border.'” (Transcript follows)

Video of the story (2:28): Real (4.2 MB) or Windows Media (4.8 MB), plus MP3 audio (1 MB)