Los Angeles Times backs Richardson's opposition to border fence
The Los Angeles Times offers the unsigned editorial (perhaps written by Andres Martinez) "Off the fence", which discusses New Mexico governor Bill Richardson's immigration speech. They call it "thoughtful" and a "rebuke to Republican immigrant bashers". Obviously, that's muddled thinking, but that's what you expect from the LAT. BR's speech was in support of illegal immigration, not the legal variety. And, supporting our immigration laws isn't "bashing".
[The fence] would merely shift the strain on the system elsewhere and fail to address the 45% of illegal immigrants who enter legally but overstay their visas.
They willfully ignore the deterrent effect the fence would provide, and I don't think anyone has said that the fence will prevent visa overstays because, obvious to all except the LAT, those are two separate issues. Something else can be done about that, and, while the LAT doesn't understand this, both that and the fence can be used at the same time (see: walking, chewing gum).
After the obligatory Dobbs bashing (he's "CNN's millionaire working-class hero"), we're informed that BR has "unusual credibility on the issue" and:
It wasn't long ago that restrictionists were singing his praises for declaring a state of emergency along the border and calling in his state's National Guard to patrol it.
I can't speak for other "restrictionists", but my August 12, 2005 entry discussing his plan started out with the phrase "New Mexico's Bill Richardson is pro-open borders and pro-racial solidarity... making this report a bit interesting, but not really all that much."
Finally, the LAT hedges:
Certainly the governor isn't right about every one of his proposals, and how his speech will affect his presidential aspirations remains to be seen. But he couldn't be more timely in reminding his party that comprehensive immigration reform is no less urgent now that Democrats control Congress.
The Democrats should indeed pick up the banner and run with it. Then, they should give us a chance to discredit sources like BR and the LAT as they fail miserably.