Signs of Delusion in New York Times Immigration Editorial
The New York Times offers the unsigned editorial "Signs of Hope on Immigration". Not only is it wrong, it's in parts so wrong it's funny. It's of the now-standard "Democrats and Bush can work to pass 'comprehensive immigration reform', but they need to tread lightly" variety.
While not explicitly engaging in the other now-standard canard that J. D. Hayworth, Randy Graf, John Hostettler, and Rick Santorum lost because of their immigration stances, it does mention them by name and refer to them as "[s]ome of the debate's loudest shouters, liars and dead-horse beaters". Then:
All those shrill Republican ads about Mexicans stealing your Social Security failed as an electoral strategy, but that doesn't mean politicians always lose by being immigration hawks... [Arizona's anti-illegal immigration propositions won...]
The NYT appears to be playing CYA for the cases of those Democrats who pretended to be "immigration hawks". And, of course, a serious newspaper would consider the ramifications of millions of former illegal aliens receiving billions of dollars in social security and other benefits, not to mention the separate issue of totalization. The NYT does not appear to have covered the first, and a search of their site for the latter term only returns two non-relevant hits.
Then, the NYT refers to the "the losers on the border-fixated fringe". In contrast, the NYT is much more "laid-back", almost comatose. For instance, they don't appear to have covered this news (PDF file):
Members of Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based terrorist organization, have already entered to the United States across our Southwest border. On March 1, 2005, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani pleaded guilty to providing material support to Hezbollah. Kourani is an illegal alien who had been smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border after bribing a Mexican consular official in Beirut for a visa to travel to Mexico. Kourani and a Middle Eastern traveling partner then paid coyotes in Mexico to guide them into the United States. Kourani established residence among the Lebanese expatriate community in Dearborn, Michigan and began soliciting funds for Hezbollah terrorists back home in Lebanon. He is the brother of the Hezbollah chief of military operations in southern Lebanon... In December 2002, Salim Boughader Mucharrafille, a cafe owner in Tijuana, Mexico, was arrested for illegally smuggling more than two hundred Lebanese illegally into the United States, including several believed to have terrorist ties to Hezbollah...
The NYT's policies would allow cases like that to repeat themselves; the policies of those who are "border-fixated" want to prevent them. Who should America trust?
They end up by promoting the Senate amnesty bill, but only after it's stripped of "tough-posing amendments that made it fundamentally unworkable and unjust". They say that (post-reform) the "laws should be enforced at the border and workplace". If the New York Times has ever supported enforcement of our current laws, I haven't seen it. What I've seen is an endless stream of pro-illegal immigration propaganda, and I have little doubt that that would continue no matter which "reform" scheme was passed.
And, they don't mention that the USCIS would almost certainly be even more overwhelmed by any form of amnesty, nor the massive legal and continuing illegal immigration that McCain-Kennedy would lead to, nor any of the other serious issues. As with terrorist infiltration, details like that are apparently for losers.