New York Times' worst immigration editorial ever: "They Are America"

The New York Times offers the unsigned editorial "They Are America". It takes up two whole screens, and pointing out all the problems in it would extend to novel length. So, let's look at just the first two paragraphs:

Almost a year ago, hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers and their families slipped out from the shadows of American life and walked boldly in daylight through Los Angeles, Washington, Chicago, New York and other cities. We Are America Alliance their banners cried. The crowds, determined but peaceful, swelled into an immense sea. The nation was momentarily stunned.

1. Many or most of those marching weren't "immigrants", they were foreign citizens who were here illegally, aka illegal aliens. And, all the marchers were marching in support of illegal immigration.
2. Those banners saying "We Are America" were actually supplied by the eponymous group at the link above. One of that group's members (CHIRLA) has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government. Another (NCLR) funds extremists.
3. Any march of hundreds of thousands of people is a show of physical force, whether they march peacefully or not.
4. Many people were indeed stunned to see foreign citizens marching in our streets, waving the flags of the countries of which they're citizens.

A lot has happened since then. The country has summoned great energy to confront the immigration problem, but most of it has been misplaced, crudely and unevenly applied. It seeks not to solve the conundrum of a broken immigration system, but to subdue, in a million ways, the vulnerable men and women who are part of it. Government at all levels is working to keep unwanted immigrants in their place β€” on the other side of the border, in detention or in fear, toiling silently in the underground economy without recourse to the laws and protections the native-born expect.

1. The immigration system is not "broken". What's broken is the enforcement of our current laws.
2. One of the government's main functions is to keep illegal aliens out of the country, something that our leaders have intentionally failed to do.
3. All residents of the U.S. are covered by various laws and protections, even illegal aliens. By using the phrase "native-born", the NYT is trying to imply that naturalized citizens and legal immigrants are in the same position as illegal aliens, something that is self-evidently false.
4. The New York Times has continually supported illegal immigration and has enabled that "underground economy" to blossom. If they were resolutely opposed to illegal immigration - for instance by exposing those who support it instead of enabling them - they could reduce the abuses they complain about.

We will always have laws against illegal immigration; those like the NYT who refuse to see any distinction between the different types of immigration and who support illegal immigration through other means are partly responsible for any consequences.

Comments

The rise of hate. The Anti-Defamation League, acutely sensitive to the presence of intolerance, has detected an increase in Ku Klux Klan activity around the country, much of it focused on hatred of new immigrants. This virus in the bloodstream usually erupts amid national ferment and fear, and according to a report available at www.adl.org, hate groups like the Klan have moved quickly to exploit the simmering debate over immigration.<(i>

If the KKK ceased to exist the ADL would (along with its sister organization the SPLC) no doubt feel compelled to reinvent it. It's their bread and butter.

The ADL has a long history of working with the FBI. It is instructive to note that an attempt to ban a neo-nazi org in Germany was fatally compromised when the Federal Court found that the leadership of the organization was thoroughly infiltrated by federal intelligence agents. Does anyone really think that things are very much different in the US?

They are Latin America, and not the best of it, by a long border-jump.
Dissembling over our need to be loyal to fellow citizens over the foreign aggressors accumulated within our borders, is another way that the NYT ed's shows how they are un-America(n).
The malice shows through; as if everything were to be evaluated according to a standard like; how most effectively to do damage, and the most damage as can be gotten away with here and now.

The New York times is a socialist rag that doesn't believe in democracy. Every one of those local and state measures are the results of a grass roots desire to curb illegal immigration and return illegal aliens to their homelands. Every one of those measures was the result of voting by the representatives of the people. The Time should accept the reality of the overwhelming strongly beliefs of the people, as to do otherwise is to support tyrrany.