Even after its divisive support for John McCain's "comprehensive immigration reform" helped sink Republicans in 2006 by estranging working-class voters from the GOP, the Wall Street Journal keeps plugging away, arguing the economic case for amnesty and open borders.
How many times have I had this discussion with my libertarian friends? Human beings are not commodities, and therefore free-trade rhetoric cannot applied to immigrants as if they were analogous to imported goods.
My 2004 KIA Optima does not burden public schools, does not impose health-care costs on taxpayers, does not require the accommodation of Korean bilingualism.
I grow weary of hearing immigration discussed as if it were a purely economic issue, where the costs and benefits can be calculated by experts applying algorithms to statistics, without regard for the political and cultural realities involved.
In 1965, the year Ted Kennedy pushed the Immigration and Nationality Act into law, we were a nation of 195 million. Today, our population exceeds 300 million, of whom the 2000 Census counted 31 million immigrants; responsible estimates of the number of illegal immigrants range as high as 12 million.
Beginning with the 1965 law, there has been no significant change to U.S. immigration law in the past 44 years that was not approved by Ted Kennedy.
In other words, we have a liberal immigration policy which, as is true of all other liberal policies, has produced disastrous consequences. And, as is so often the case, liberals now insist that the solution to the problems resulting from their own policies is . . . wait for it . . . more liberalism.
For at least 15 years, the editors of the Wall Street Journal have played a perfidious and dishonest role in the debate over this issue, obscuring rather than enlightening, like a squid inking the waters, and heaping opprobrium on any conservative who dares speak blunt truth.
Calling them out won't stop them from continuing their harmful folly. They have shown themselves to be beyond shame. But it is alway important to call things by their right names, and this principle extends to accurately describing as worthless two-faced sons of bitches the editors of the Wall Street Journal.
Big, bad Steve Bannon and Priebus speak at CPAC2017 VIDEO - For over a month now, the media has tried to make Steve Bannon out to be this big, bad, nasty
1 hour ago