VodkaPundit [1] and HereticalIdeas [2] link to a WSJ editorial about immigration, "Let Their People Come." [3]

The article, as one might suspect, supports immigration. However, no details are given as to whether that includes legal immigration or illegal immigration, what types and levels thereof, etc. The entire editorial could be replaced with the simple statement "immigration good," and Brendan Miniter could have saved himself and his readers a few minutes.

About the only actual content in the editorial is when he misrepresents Michelle Malkin's various writings about immigration into a strawman platitude: "Of course, these arguments have some merit; America needs to be vigilant about keeping terrorists out."

As I suggested in comments sent to the WSJ, perhaps for his next editorial he could includes actual facts and proposals. For instance, what does the WSJ think of SB60, the bill proposed by CA state Senator Gil Cedillo that would give driver's licenses to illegal aliens? Since one of the reasons given by Cedillo is that "they were here first," perhaps the WSJ could address whether that's historically accurate (hint: it isn't) and whether it's a patently anti-American sentiment. And, perhaps they could address the various consequences of this bill. Nothing like a few details, right?

I'll also note that the reader comments to this article [4] provide much more detail than the editorial and are almost all in favor of some form of immigration reform. Those are what you should read, not the editorial.

---------
[1] vodkapundit . com/archives/004051.php
[2] hereticalideas . com/archives/000820.html
[3] opinionjournal . com/columnists/bminiter/?id=110003701
[4] opinionjournal . com/columnists/bminiter/responses.html?article_id=110003701