Take action now: Take the Stop Amnesty Challenge.

It's up to you to block Obama's amnesty.
 

NYT: illegal immigration is "New York's special gift to America" (unhinged anti-Gillibrand editorial)

The part Mexican-owned New York Times offers the editorial "Listening to Ms. Gillibrand" (link). They're wrong as usual, and they're even more unhinged than usual too. Red-faced with anger at country mouse Kirsten Gillibrand's Upstate ways, they lose it right about here:

Ms. Gillibrand's House votes on immigration amounted to a repudiation of New York's special gift to America. She allied herself solidly with expulsionist Republicans, who reject assimilation in favor of locking down the border, deporting 12 million illegal immigrants and enshrining English as America's one true tongue. She has favored enforcement rigidity over common sense; she was one of the first to denounce former Gov. Eliot Spitzer's well-meaning effort to make sure illegal immigrants drive with licenses and insurance.

They probably wouldn't be touting NYC's "special gift" if they were located on the Mexican border. Instead, NYC is a port city which was an entryway for a large number of the legal immigrants who helped build the U.S. The current situation is markedly different from what it was when NYC delivered their "special gift". Any New Yorker should be offended that the NYT would try to pretend that the current situation - massive illegal activity and massive corruption designed to support crooked businesses and governments - is comparable to that "special gift".

Further, whatever Gillibrand's position on deportations, no national GOP leaders support mass deportations as the NYT implies. They support attrition, a plan that the NYT has acknowledged as a possibility, except in cases like this when it suits their strawman argument. They even acknowledge it below, despite implying a much more severe plan above.

As for Eliot Spitzer, his changing of the rules relating to Motor Voter showed exactly how "well-meaning" his plan was.

Ms. Gillibrand has not shown that she understands the ineffectiveness and moral bankruptcy of enforcement-only schemes. To take one example: The SAVE Act, which she co-sponsored, was all about border fencing and requiring everyone in America to prove legal status before being allowed to work. Nothing in it required or allowed immigrants to come forward and legalize. It was meant to seem tough, but was actually a weak reassertion of the status quo, in which undocumented immigrants are denied hope of legal status while the government tries to make them so miserable that they go home. That is a recipe for creating and exploiting a cheap, docile underclass.

It's the NYT that's promoted that underclass, by constantly supporting illegal activity. Just a month ago, another editorial wanted to underwrite keeping illegal aliens in the U.S. rather than encouraging them to return home.

As for "moral bankruptcy", the NYT is engaging in false compassion. They support propping up the corrupt Mexican government through advocating for remittances; they support allowing that government to send us those people who might otherwise remain in Mexico to push for reforms; they support allowing illegal aliens to take college educations away from U.S. citizens; and, what they support will encourage more people to cross the desert with some dying along the way.

Sat, 01/31/2009 - 15:14 · Importance: 14

Sun, 02/01/2009 - 00:16
eh

_The New York Times_ It's like self-parody at this point.

Sun, 02/01/2009 - 03:47
llamajockey

Editor's Note: Can now also be accurately referred to as the _Slim Times_.

Sun, 02/01/2009 - 12:39
c1on

OPERATION: (br,bl ALIEN) WETBACKII

Sun, 02/01/2009 - 13:12
llamajockey

Lonewacko, I don't know why this incredibly wacko NYT editorial does not fill you with absolute joy. It opens the door to the possibility that Gillibrand may face a serious primary challenge from an all out pro-open borders lefty like Campaign for America's Futures and ActBlue's supported pick Carolyn Maloney. As you have reported many times the Soros funded psuedo-progressive CfAF and ActBlue have endorsed far left pro-borders candidates in Democrat primaries across the country. In the vast majority of these cases the pro-Open Borders candidate was soundly beaten by the immigration moderate/restrictionist Democrat. In fact I can not think of a single CfAF or ActBlue candidate that won a primary where the public had a clear choice on the immigration issue. However, in no case did the MSM report just how unpopular open borders polices are with the fast majority of Democratic voters. Next month we are likely to see another prime example of this when the ActBlue/Daily Kos/NutsRoots candidate of choice Thomas Geoghegan goes down in a massive defeat in the Democrat primary for the special election to take over Rahm Emanuel's IL-5 district. This would be the third time the open-borders left tried in vain to take over the 5th district. Still I would not expect the MSM to report the significance in regards to immigration of an IL-5 primary result. HOWEVER, A NEW YORK SENATE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY RACE WHERE THE NYT, NEWSDAY AND THE REST OF PRO-OPEN BORDERS NY MEDIA\'S CANDIDATE OF CHOICE GOES DOWN TO A CLEAR DEFEAT OVER THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE WILL NOT BE IGNORED BY THE PUBLIC OR DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP.

Sun, 02/01/2009 - 13:24
llamajockey

Lonewacko, In 2008 the MSM and the Open Borders lobby's strategy was to make dam sure that immigration was not an issue in the 2008 election. At least not an issue subject to open rigorous debate. And not just at the Presidential level but at the congressional and state level as well. Now you have the NYT under the increasing influence of Carlos Slim threatening to make a monumental change in strategy by indicating a willingness to make immigration a front and center issue in not just a major Blue State election in 2010 but in the country's largest and most influential media market. You have got to like that.

Mon, 02/02/2009 - 03:34
Fred Dawes
www.myspace.com/freddawes1776

our enemies at work, its all coming down to a fight for life over death and total tyrant. slim will buy the state and most would sell out.

Mon, 02/02/2009 - 23:40
Don McAninch

In this time of high unemployment and overpopulation, it is vital to start eliminating immigration. Both legal and illegal immigration should be reduced to zero.

Wed, 02/04/2009 - 14:59
Fred Dawes
www.myspace.com/freddawes1776

never happening Don McAninch the American will be totally eliminated and that is the plan of our enemies ( u.s government state government and local government ) and its working real well.