Default
Democrat Sees MSM Open Borders Editorial Policies Also Affecting Their Reporting
Default author
June 04, 2007, 05:00 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

The badly infected, pro open border editorial views of most major papers such as the Wall Street Journal, the NY Times and the Washington Post can`t help but have influence on the reporting of the news pages.

For example: the Washington Post story, page one right column and full page inside of Monday, June 4th intones, "After a week at home with their constituents, the Senate architects of a delicate immigration compromise are increasingly convinced that they will hold together this week to pass an overhaul of the nation`s immigration laws, with momentum building behind one unifying theme: Today`s immigration system is too broken to go unaddressed." [Backers of Immigration Bill  More Optimistic | Lawmakers Cite Sense of Urgency By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post June 4, 2007]

Hey, right.  It is broken and needs fixed, but what we hear is a rush to judgment that doesn`t fix it. The so called "deliberative body" the US Senate is ignoring 42 years of mistakes and plunging us into another amnesty before we have fixed the ones wrought by Johnson in 1965 and Reagan in 1986.  Both of these disasters will be further exacerbated by S1348 which systematically has been put together to avoid real enforcement and to serve up quickly and painlessly the business owners of our Congress the cheap labor they want on a legalized platter.

We average citizens have long begged for enforcement first.  Not just promised enforcement, as has been the case over and over, but enforcement tested  by time and patience. Doing this obscene "quickie" (S1348) makes our Senate appear to be performing a one night stand in a sleazy motel, for which we citizens will get no respect afterwards.

Despite our protests, which came in huge numbers in the past two weeks, apparently the backers of this travesty think that a perceived slowing of emails, calls, and other urgent importuning from constituents means that these constituents have changed their minds about the need to have tested enforcement first before giving 12 to 20 million illegal aliens citizenship.

Example: (and here is how a paper`s editorial policy gets insidiously into its reporting) The Post lead immigration story says

"Congress`s week-long Memorial Day recess was expected to leave the bill in tatters. But with a week of action set to begin today, the legislation`s champions say they believe that the voices of opposition, especially from conservatives, represent a small segment of public opinion. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who led negotiations on the bill for his party, said the flood of angry calls and protests that greeted the deal two weeks ago has since receded every day.
"You just have to recognize you will get 300 calls, you`ll get conflicts at town hall meetings—all of them negative," said Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who consulted with Kyl and hopes to carry a similar deal through the House in July. "The last few days have really turned things around."

Then the supposed clincher, the Post story says,

"Public opinion polls seem to support Kyl`s contention that Americans are far more open to the deal than the voices of opposition would indicate. In a Washington Post-ABC News released today, 52 percent of Americans said they would support a program giving illegal immigrants the right to stay and work in the United States if they pay a fine and meet other requirements. Opposition to that proposal was 44 percent."

Even if the poll is accurate, which is questionable, and depends solely on how the question was posed, did they ask American citizens if they were prepared to cede their tax supported services to the horde of illegal aliens which the Heritage Foundation`s reports describe?

What has Senator Kyl been promised as his reward for his defection from reason and fairness?

Here we are some 21 years after the last horrendous bill, which failed to solve the illegal immigration problem about to compound this felony with another bad bill which will make the 1986 legislation look like a minor glitch when millions more stream across illegally in the decades to come.

This legislation will eat our seed corn, folks, and the so called "most prestigious" papers in the country are leading the charge both editorially and reportorially.  Thank goodness we still have voices like the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Lou Dobbs, and let me say, immodestly, VDARE.com, who know the truth and keep preaching it to an ever wider audience. 

Our democracy is being broken by the takeover by corporate America`s businesses of our government with its giant lobbying machinery with its payola power over our elected officials, its power to advertise (or not) in our media (as our newspapers are fatally weakened by other news sources) and by the increasing lack of education on public affairs on the part of the average American.  I am not bullish on our capacity to pull out of the decline in public awareness which can only lead to increasing enslavement of the non-rich and non-powerful by those in power.

If legislation as bad as this can be hyped into law, we are lost. The Senate may pass this abomination, but now we can only pray it will falter in the House.

About the Author: Collins, a free lance writer living in Washington, DC. , is a board member of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).  However,  his views are his own.

Donald A. Collins [email him], is a freelance writer living in Washington DC and a former long time member of the board of FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform. His views are his own.