Originally Posted by Invictus

Specifically, I've started work on something along the line of what I've mentioned.

The goal is to pick out common objections to CIR/DA and refute them comprehensively and clearly, time and time again through any media outlet possible so that these objections will not come up again.

If this is communicated with the right tone (less combative and aggressive and more rational and even-handed), I'm confident it will reap rewards. But the key is in how we refute the message. We should NEVER come across like activists peddling a message, otherwise we will be characterized as partisan. We need to come across very even-handed, almost as if we have no invested interest in the outcome.

I've made a basic framework of important points here, found another list here as well. In order to build on this, I find an effective way is to simply trawl online articles and read the responses to get a feeling of what points the nativists tend to bring up.

The one thing I cannot do is go in front of the media. I don't have the right contacts, don't have a means of assembling or taking part in a campaign physically. The actual dissemination of information will have to be taken on by the relevant groups who have enough sway so that Maddow, O'Reilly, Chris Matthews and whoever will actually notice them, let alone buy the story.

If this was a project in the works, I would love to put my heart and soul into it, formulating answers, editing, researching, etc.