NYT editorial: supports illegal activity; acknowledges attrition; "pest control"

As soon as I hear the words "New York Times editorial" I, like no doubt most others, think "wrong". The latest is on display in "The Misery Strategy". Notably, the NYT has finally acknowledged attrition - enforcing our laws in order to encourage illegal aliens to go home - as a strategy. This contrasts with their prior attempts to present a false choice between mass deportations and a massive amnesty. I guess they knew about attrition all along, they were just being disingenuous.

But, of course, they disagree with this strategy, claiming that it won't work because the situations in the home countries of those illegal aliens are so dire they won't leave. Of note, they don't suggest encouraging those other countries to repatriate their citizens, nor do they suggest urging (in one way or another) those other countries to make situations there more amenable.

And, of course, there's the name-calling: they explicitly state that "ideologues" want to "unleash a flood of misery upon millions of illegal immigrants". And, this:

The American people cherish lawfulness but resist cruelty, and have supported reform that includes a reasonable path to earned citizenship. Their leaders have given them immigration reform as pest control.

And, their disingenuousness (or schizophrenia, or inability to think things through) is on full display. This:

The latest phase of the crackdown... would require employers to resolve discrepancies between their employee records and those of the Social Security Administration... There are millions of people in thousands of workplaces who could be caught in that net, and the government is promising to start dragging it zealously, with stepped-up raids around the country.

Is followed by this:

The Senate had struggled for years to erect the immense framework of bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform, coupling stricter enforcement with a citizenship path and an orderly future flow of workers.

That "reform" would have encouraged millions more illegal aliens to try to come here, and according to "reform" stepped-up enforcement - the kind promoted by the NYT - would be performed to keep them out or send them home. Yet, the NYT is currently trying to portray enforcement of our laws in the most negative light possible. Certainly, a defense for them would be to say that they would support enforcement if there were some sort of "pathway" and "guest" worker program, but does anyone really believe that? Post-"reform", wouldn't the NYT simply write similar editorials opposing the enforcement of the "reform" they supported?

The bottom line is the bottom line: the NYT - for one corrupt reason or another - supports massive immigration of any kind. And, they'll continue to do so, no matter whether "reform" eventually passes or not.

Immigration2007a · Thu, 08/09/2007 - 09:25 · · Importance: 1