WATERS MUDDIED WHEN CAUSES UNITE.

Byline: BRIDGET JOHNSON

LOOKING at today's street protests, it's hard to tell which came first, the cart or the horse. Or the ``legalization now'' pro-immigration cry or the ``out of Iraq now'' anti-war refrain. Was it the ``impeach Bush'' advocates or the living-wage proponents?

Despite the very different issues, the rallies for left-wing causes are most often one and the same. You could say that it's because of some opportunistic sign-wielders who seize the publicity to champion their pet cause. But it's more organized and institutionalized than that.

Take the Sept. 28 cop-a-squat on Century Boulevard, billed by organizers as the greatest act of civil disobedience in Los Angeles history, where pre-selected activists took a seat in the street during rush hour to be escorted off in pre-arranged arrests.

The purpose of the street theater, which I attended, was two causes that one thinks would work against each other: Labor union demands higher wages for hotel workers near the airport. Throw in the immigration issue, as the protesters were demanding higher wages for immigrant hotel labor, legal status unimportant. Turn the protests into a ``si se puede'' march reminiscent of the anti-Sensenbrenner rallies, throw in immigration-activist sponsors and hoist signs demanding full legalization and decrying Minutemen as Klansmen.

``Any sizable increase in the number of immigrants will inevitably lower wages for some American workers,'' states a 2004 paper by Harvard University economics professor George J. Borjas. ``Conversely, reducing the supply of labor by strict immigration enforcement and reduced legal immigration would increase the earnings of native workers.''

Have unions so lost their way that they are rallying for higher wages while supporting a cause that drives down wages? Or is the ideological alliance with left-wing causes more important to them?

Another example of inane, catch-all, backfiring alliances is that of the anti-Israel lobby and United Teachers Los Angeles. On Oct. 14, the L.A. chapter of the Movement for a Democratic Society was to hold a rally and Israeli boycott, divestment and sanctions planning meeting at UTLA headquarters, hosted by UTLA's Human Rights Committee. Local Jewish groups decried the union hosting such events, and UTLA President A.J. Duffy issued a statement late last week saying the meeting couldn't take place at the union building.

The MDS ``Statement on the `New Middle East','' posted in August on the Los Angeles Independent Media Center site, lauds terror groups Hamas and Hezbollah, stating, ``We support a new internationalism founded on unity and solidarity with popular, mass-based resistance movements such as Hamas and Hizbullah struggling against those who oppress us all.''

Considering that Hamas has killed children (seven alone in the 2001 Sbarro pizzeria bombing) in its suicide attacks and encourages Palestinian kids to become ``martyrs,'' and Hezbollah uses children as human shields in its blend-in brand of warfare, why would any teacher offer their wholehearted support?

Are L.A. teachers unwittingly signing up for Mideast advocacy with union dues?

Rabbi Abraham Cooper at the Simon Wiesenthal Center -- which is still asking that Duffy take ``explicit moral leadership'' on the UTLA committee's anti-Israel boycott efforts instead of just changing meeting venues -- said frustrated rank-and-file union members have been contacting the center, asking, ``What does this have to do with the needs of our community and our children?''

Mixing apples and oranges creates a fruit-loopy political arena. But don't tell that to the activists intent on forming alliances to bulk their own ranks or to the allies who think they've suddenly gained a sophisticated worldview.