Los Angeles Times supports illegal immigration, again and again

Christopher Goffard of the LAT offers "Costa Mesa's Border Heat Puts a Chill in Its Latinos". First, of course, there's the title's assumption that all Latinos are either illegal aliens or supporters of same. Then, the LAT offers the impression that supporting illegal immigration is a "generous" thing and opposing it is only for meanies:
In a Republican county known as a cradle of border enforcement zeal, Costa Mesa has long been celebrated — and maligned — as a city that offered immigrants a generous embrace...

Now, [a Latino with illegal aliens in the family] said, the city seems meaner, less like home...

...What Costa Mesa has are high-profile charities, such as Share Our Selves. All week long, immigrants stream in for medical care, clothes and bags of groceries — workers who clean the city's big houses, keep its yards hedged and oil the gears of its humming economy. They know the 36-year-old charity is a friendly place that won't ask about their citizenship.

The charity helped forge Costa Mesa's incongruous reputation as "a city with a heart" — to use the words of a former county supervisor — in a county that has been a caldron of border-enforcement sentiment...
What would happen if SOS went away? Well, all those "immigrants" might find it more difficult to live there. And, fewer would come. And, all those who are profiting off of illegal immigration would be forced to raise their prices to attract legal workers. This article could have been ordered up by those who are profiting off cheap labor.

Perhaps it's time for the LAT to drop the charade that supporting illegal immigration is the generous thing to do, when in fact all it does is support those who are trying to profit off of illegal activity.

As always, readers.rep *at* latimes.com is your friend.


I'm having trouble deciding: Does the LAT put out this sort of childish crap because they really are just that unprofessional, or do they do it as sort of an inside joke designed to show how much disdain they have for the intelligence of their readership?

"stream in"

The gloss-over words about stark need borne of dire poverty produced by the 'streaming in' of economically marginal immigrants are worth noting.

"keep its yards hedged"

As are those indicating a big gap between haves and have nots -- imported social pathology, made even worse because most of the haves and have nots are predominantly of different ethnicities. Didn't the country just go through a major paroxysm trying to address just this issue; is it wise to import the problem all over again?

And just how would any of this be made better if we continued the same laxity regarding the border and enforcement of immigration law?