The WSJ's Agenda

For whatever reason, (or maybe it is irrational) the Wall Street Journal has been opposed to 'borders' for years, as Levin points out here. That position regularly shows, more or less, on its editorial pages.

As a consequence of its "no borders" position, the WSJ is doing its level best to scare Republican Senators (and Representatives) with the Apocalypse: "No more election wins for YOU, Republicans, unless you vote for the Amnesty Bill!!!"

In other words, the Journal would have the Republicans forgo the national interest for race-politics.

They endorse the Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton methodology. No small irony there, folks.

A local radio pundit spent an hour trying to make the WSJ's position rational. He failed, of course. There's no way to do so.

Levin assesses their position as follows:

Today’s Journal writers aren’t as honest as their predecessors. They deny this bill provides for amnesty. In the past, they would have proudly proclaimed it. Today’s Journal writers take refuge in the anonymity of the editorial page as they assassinate the character of those with whom they disagree. Apparently, those who insist on enforcing the law are racists. Those who insist that the government fulfill its obligation to secure the border and punish businesses that hire illegal aliens are anti-Hispanic.

Moreover, the Journal writers are beset with delusion. They pretend that those opposing the comprehensive amnesty bill are a vocal minority within the Republican party. Well, most reputable polls show that Americans, regardless of party, overwhelmingly oppose amnesty and insist on border security. They don’t favor open borders, as the Journal editorial page does.

The Journal writers are prodding Republicans to play ethnic politics. They argue that if the Republicans are viewed as anti-Hispanic, they will lose elections. Of course, the Journal writers are perpetuating that smear by assigning racist motives to opponents of the bill.

But Republicans do best when they run on principle and act on principle. Unlike the Journal writers, I happen to believe that Hispanic Americans are motivated by the same principles as other Americans, including — liberty, security, the rule of law, capitalism, and faith.

The Journal assigns recent losses in Hispanic support for the Republican party to opposition by the “vocal minority” within the party to amnesty. Where’s the evidence for this? For all we know, a majority in the Hispanic community is opposed to the war, profligate spending, or any of a dozen other issues. In the last election, support for the Republican party declined across the ethnic spectrum, including among whites.

The WSJ's editorials are often rational and persuasive. But on this topic, as well as on "Free Trade" (a myth, as things stand now) they are utterly devoid of foundation in reason and reality.