Posted on 07/10/2013 9:48:47 AM PDT by jimbo123
Today the 234 House Republicans will meet behind closed doors in a therapy session that could decide the fate of immigration reform. This will be raucous and maybe enlightening. The GOP is splintered and confused on immigration, and this has left the party with no coherent or winning message. Too often Americans hear the shrillest anti-immigration Republicans whose only argument is "secure the border," as if that is a sensible policy for the 21st century.
House Speaker John Boehner's job is to make sure those voices don't carry the day. He and his colleagues face a fundamental choice: kill immigration reform, or try to pass constructive and pro-growth measures that have broad public and business support, including from millions of conservatives.
-snip-
Republicans should also be willing to debate and vote on the issue of legalizing 11 million illegal immigrants. We support this path to citizenship
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Without 100% of the fence being built. Immigration reform should be off the table.
Let’s focus on jobs, killing Obamacare and other policies of this administration that is destroying this country.
The WSJ is shilling for cheap labor. How about putting your fellow citizens ahead of profit for once you idiots? For a group that prides itself on being for free markets why do they insist on forcing through a bill that is anti-free market? This bill has artificial wages structures negociated between unions and business interests that have nothing to do with an employees skills or output. Last time I checked wages in a free market were determined by those to aspects alone. Quite frankly if your business can’t survive without paying a fair market wage you don’t deserve to keep your doors open.
WSJ gone full-blown lib.
I certainly don’t subscribe to the notion that the Repubs are confused. This “meeting” should not even be happening. They are a bunch of self-serving politicians concerned primarily with their “jobs” and keeping the ability to gain far more money and power than they would as mortal citizens working for a living, than they are serving the American public and preserving America as a Constitutional Republic based in law.
And people wonder why their performance rating with real Americans in our population, is in the tank. MANY of them need to be replaced. They are sitting watching America burn.
With modern technology, it is certainly a practical as well as sensible policy. The alternative is chaos, where we lose practical control of our own domains.
Unfortunately, the internationalist propagandists for undermining the very concept of a nation--those who seek new "world orders"--have hit upon the carrot to undermine rational thinking among many of the cadres of Corporate management, that is by total, myopic focus on short-term business interests, in dollars & cents, without regard to what those dollars & cents will actually buy. Thus the Journal is more interested in the imagined benefit of huge numbers of unemployed & underemployed workers, to keep labor costs down. They also see the more people, the more customers for their products & services; also as a cure to the languishing housing market in many areas.
Lest anyone in those bemused cadres reflect on the longer term consequences of trying to integrate culturally very different populations into stable communities; or observe that people create their culture, not the other way around, and that more and more of California is increasingly more like Mexico than America, the would be thought police of the Left, silence them from voicing such concerns with the usual litany of slanders, "racist," "bigot," "elitist," etc..
We saw how effective this smear technique was, a few weeks ago, in forcing the young Conservative scholar, Jason Richwine out of the Heritage Foundation. See Jason Richwine Incident.
The Wall Street Journal would do well to stick to financial analysis, and not try to promote major changes in the demographic characteristics of the population.
Those of us, who want to preserve the America that we inherited, will find it absolutely necessary to ignore the advice offered in this article.
William Flax
The WSJ have always been open border hacks.
They represent the country clubber wing. What the hell do they care if the middle class is destroyed and replaced with low wage drones.
How on earth are people who are in this country illegally deserving of "citizenship"? McCain and his Gang of 8 have NO respect for our nation as they are unwilling to enforce our laws and won't enforce any "new" ones as as their past clearly shows. ZIP except for a few feet of fencing.
Call speaker Boehner
Phone: (202) 225-0600
Fax: (202) 225-5117
This is one topic where the WSJ (and the Catholic Church as well) have been sniffing glue. What about the rule of law? What good are these laws going to do if you can’t even enforce the current ones?
For the most part however, the editorial section remains reliably conservative, and the news section, while surely teeming with libs, is not so over-the top, especially in comparison to a typical city-based liberal rag.
The good thing too is, the readers of the WSJ will skewer this ridiculous viewpoint in the letters section in the coming days.
Wow, what happened to the Wall Street Journal?
Didn’t they used to frown on communism?
Anything particularly sharp and informed will never make it to publication.
” We support this path to citizenship”
Thank you for your daily pro-amnesty editorial, you traitorous piece if $hit!
"pro-growth" for Dem voters and leftist policies!
See my reply #6.
But to specifically answer your question, many of those in the business community have bought into the environmentalist/egalitarian make-believe that people are only so much plastic biology to be constantly remolded, by changing their cultural environment (the fallacy that underpins all Marxist & Jacobin type fantasies). These people are only important to business people brainwashed in Academia into that fantasy, as statistics--as warm bodies who may be useful to their businesses in some manner.
Jefferson, whose brilliant understanding of the realities of human nature, played so great a part in our foundation, warned about the problems of confusing the Hispanic cultures South of the border, with the Anglo/Celtic of the original States, when he purchased Louisiana as an intended buffer against just what is being promoted by the Journal here. (Discussed in Immigration & The American Future.)
The rights of Mexicans to run Mexico, and keep it Mexican, is certainly something that we should respect. In that process we should respect their right to control their border. In visiting their country, we should respect their laws, customs, traditions. What possible argument is there for our not being able to expect the same respect in return?
Ninety-four years ago, Massachusetts Senator Henry Cabot Lodge delivered a speech on the Senate floor, in which he deplored those businessmen to whom all countries were alike, so long as they could make money in them. If I had a copy handy, I would post a selection. Maybe, tomorrow!
God forgive us for not doing a better job in answering this sort of warped argument that the Journal offers, before this.
William Flax
IN ORDER FOR THE HOUSE REPS TO GET ‘UN-CONFUSED’ ABOUT IMMIGRATION COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE SEND BOEHNER AND ANY REPUBLICAN WHO IS SQUISHY ON THE EVILS OF THIS IMMIGRATION BILL..... ANN COULTER’S GREAT INSTRUCTIONS ON THE THE NEED TO KILL THE BILL, JEEEESH!..
http://www.teaparty.org/ann-coulter-u-s-finished-if-amnesty-passes-25564/
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/06/21/ann-coulter-hannity-blasts-gop-rubio-immigration-amnesty-bill
I have to admit that I would love to be in that room and listen to the debate/discussion - on both sides of the issue.
Over the years, the WSJ’s editorials have gone soft on mnay issues.
if you want red maeat for editorials, I’d encourage you to buy a copy of Investors Business Daily.
Trust me, there guys pull no punches. You know exactly where they stand - and they stand solidly to the right!
Just another example of why I gave up reading the WSJ long ago
These internationalists don’t believe in borders. They are ok with the welfare state to take care of al
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.