February 27, 2007
Larry Kudlow - former Ronald Reagan economic advisor, current CNBC host and guest on Hugh Hewitt's show - has been a minor-league supporter of the Bush/Fox/Democrats immigration scheme. However, he's just admitted on his site just how ignorant he is of this issue.
He
discusses the recent story "Mexican wives seek ouster of husbands from U.S." (
link; pointed out here last April in
"Mexican village artisans plead with U.S.: enforce your laws") and says (put on a Hugh Hewitt voice for full effect):
These Mexican wives seem to be saying that family breakup is a bad idea, even though their husbands are sending extra money back home.
As a free trader, I favor the Bush comprehensive immigration reform plan, which includes better border security, temporary worker cards, and ultimately, a path to citizenship.
However, family breakup is very troubling for a social conservative like myself.
Frankly, the extent of this family breakup problem is new information to me. I find it troubling.
All this time, this idiot has been promoting Bush's scheme, and he had (or says he had) no knowledge of the social disruption massive immigration to the U.S. causes? What else is he ignorant of? What else are similar hacks such as David Brooks, Tamar Jacoby, Fred Barnes, etc. ignorant of? How thick is their bubble, and are they even able to see anything outside of it?
In brief, Kudlow wasn't aware of these issues when he signed the
Independent Institute's Open Letter on Immigration. He wasn't aware of these issues when he was told by president Bush that
"immigration helps restore our souls." He wasn't aware of these issues when he said
that "[Hispanic immigrants would] become a much-needed churchgoing blue-collar middle class . . . that is crucial to a healthy America." Do the fellow members of the
Free Enterprise Fund know as little as he does?
Posted to Immigration2007a at February 27, 2007 03:21 PM
Comments
"What else is he ignorant of?"
He is ignorant of ALL other issues that immigration affects, because every law or problem is defined now in the US as a battle between racists and innocent victims. That there might be another prism from which to view this massive lawbreaking and cultural upheaval is just beginning to dawn on him. Hopefully, it's not too late for the US.
Posted by: Pat at February 27, 2007 04:09 PM
Of course if they were given amnesty then they WOULD be able to visit their families on weekends and holidays and they WOULD be able to bring their families with them. Problem solved.
Posted by: George Clinton at February 27, 2007 04:09 PM
George, that must be the "...totally reasonable, centrist approach to the whole [immigration issue]." that Arnie is talking about...
Posted by: steve at February 27, 2007 05:14 PM
Well, if most of these people rely on the media it is no wonder they haven't a clue. The media has been guilty of ommission over and over about this crisis. To them even the phrase Illegal Immigrant is a no-no.......These folks need to get educated for once and for all!
Posted by: mary at February 27, 2007 07:16 PM
Kudlow is the same idiot who dismisses any attempt to reduce the obscenely large trade imbalance between the US and China as "China-bashing".
Posted by: perroazul del norte at February 27, 2007 07:56 PM
Which one of us is forcibly bringing these "husbands" to the United States in chains? Isn't it interesting that when a foreigner makes a voluntary decision, somehow it is the fault of the United States?
Posted by: passingthru at February 27, 2007 11:01 PM
No one forced them to come here, and no one claimed that it was the fault of the United States. But that does not negate the fact that IF THEY WERE GIVEN AMNESTY THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO VISIT THEIR FAMILIES AND THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BRING THEIR FAMILIES WITH THEM.
Posted by: Dr Funkenstein at February 28, 2007 05:25 AM
Some of us would prefer to fill the country up with our own grandchildren rather than with the grandchildren of foreigners. If that's racism, make the most of it.
Posted by: dchamil at February 28, 2007 05:31 AM
dchamil, it is not racism for a nation to have a border, anymore than it is for a house to have a door. Friends and family are welcomed, after they ring the doorbell. Turning away strangers, locking the door against burglars, is not racism. Deportation for all is humane and it is not punishment. No one is being sent to prison, they are only being sent back to their own homes and families.
Posted by: Jeebie at February 28, 2007 09:28 AM
Jeebie, I quite agree with you. But supporters of immigration restriction like me are going to be called racists, come what may. This well-worn epithet may be losing its bite, at long last.
Posted by: dchamil at March 1, 2007 07:02 AM
Hi, dchamil. PC speech is is losing ground, but not without a fight. State Sen. Wilson from Miami has introduced legislation to eliminate the term "illegal alien", because it makes illegals feel bad. The term "racism" has been so abused, it is an empty epithet.This morning, my paper has a story of the California high school freshman reprimanded for saying "thats so gay", to her pals. She meant "silly" but it didn't stop the school from reprimanding her, or the parents from going to court. Freedom of speech is constantly under attack, thankfully more Americans are fed up and say "enough". PC speech wants us all to feel good, but it is thought control, and is at its core, dishonest. It damages society rather than helping, because it embraces lies as the truth. The truth sometimes stings a little bit, but I much prefer honesty and clarity.
Posted by: Jeebie at March 1, 2007 08:10 AM
