The ugly fact is that the bulk of MSM coverage of the Obamacrats' Administrative Amnesty Coup D’état – including the Op-Eds – is Treason Lobby triumphalism, unquestionably getting more raucous as the silence of all but a few GOP figures becomes even more deafening. A classic specimen is Obama’s immigration policy points in the right direction The Boston Globe August 29, 2011. Tellingly, it has been disseminated by the key political aggregator Real Clear Politics.
This editorial gloats
Last spring, after some local police forces complained that nonviolent people whom they picked up incidentally were being subject to deportation, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton directed his staff to focus on deporting those who pose a threat to national security or public safety…The new government-wide policy lays out procedures for the entire system, including immigration judges at the Justice Department, and finally brings enforcement practices in line with the administration’s priorities.
(Interesting that at their moment of triumph the Treason Lobby nevertheless wants to shift the responsibility elsewhere. And why should any police department get to decide “nonviolent” law breakers get a pass? The “administration’s priorities” of course, have long obviously been directed at Amnesty.)
The Globe spins on:
…the new initiative would give Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano…the ability to provide relief from deportation in cases that would cause undue hardship. Thus, she would have the authority to spare a high-school valedictorian who grew up in the United States from being sent “home’’ to a nation his parents left when he was a toddler.
(Also the Teen Welfare Mother, hugely more common than illegal immigrant valedictorians.)
Having worked up into a tantrum, the Globe declaims
Politicians and activists who focus exclusively on a “law-and-order’’ approach to illegal immigration undermine the larger interests of law enforcement by insisting that all undocumented Americans are equally culpable. They’re not. Separating those who commit crimes from those who are simply trying to eke out a living is the first step toward an orderly process for coping with a serious and long-neglected problem. No one should benefit from illegal activity, and giving guest-worker status to peaceful, undocumented workers who follow the laws and pay taxes does not give them a leg up on others who have sought to come here lawfully.
“Undocumented Americans” indeed! And how can the final sentence be construed to make sense?
One of the few rays of light in this grotesque scene of despotism comes from the comment threads to articles like these. The patriotic segment of the public is starting to react: they know what has been done and they are angry. Consider the comment by “Angela S”, recommended by 80 readers as I write:
ILLEGAL immigrants must be deported— fine focus on the worst of the worst first — but THEY ALL MUST GO! And, let's not forget how Governor Patrick has blood on his hands for his refusal to cooperate in ridding the state of Massachusetts of these criminals, thus directly resulting in the death of American college graduate Matthew Denice. Governor Patrick's support for immigration lawbreakers has resulted in direct harm to AMERICAN CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants and is patently disturbing and unacceptable to any thinking person!
4. The MOST ERRONEOUS thing in this article is the implication that only the right-wing fringe is preventing the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform". The truth is that Americans across the political spectrum (including this Democrat and '08 Obama voter) are DISGUSTED that our government has refused to enforce its own laws and WE MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT WANT AMNESTY FOR IMMIGRATION LAWBREAKERS. WE WILL OPPOSE ANYONE AT THE BALLOT BOX WHO HAS SUPPORTED AMNESTY FOR IMMIGRATION LAWBREAKERS. The costs of the taxpayer subsidies that are paid to ILLEGAL immigrants are enormous—far surpassing any costs of deporting them.
The Editorial makes numerous false representations, among them:
1. The Editorial states: "No one should benefit from illegal activity" AND THEN GOES ON TO ENSORSE REWARDING IMMIGRATION LAWBREAKERS WITH AMNESTY. I don't think the readership is as stupid as this Editorial Board thinks we are— we can see that you are endorsing conferring benefits upon the lawbreakers. Any such benefits, are, of course, patently unacceptable!
2. ILLEGAL immigrants are not "undocumented workers", as this Editorial mischaracterizes them; rather, they have numerous documents— FRADULENT ONES! How else do you think they secure jobs at which they are LEGALLY PROHIBITTED from working? The fact is that these documents constitute yet additional criminal acts (falsely filling out an I9 is a FELONY) above the illegal immigration crime itself and cause harm to American citizens and LEGAL immigrants on a daily basis.
3. Another false statement is that granting amnesty to immigration lawbreakers will not give them a "leg up on others who have sought to come here lawfully" — WELL YES IT DOES because you are advocating that they jump right to the front of the line rather than being referred to the back of the line— which is precisely what must occur.
NB Comment 4. The overwhelming majority of the 110 comments (as I write) are just as negative and many are well-argued and intelligent.
This act of Constitutional banditry will infuriate a politically potent group. Will the GOP leadership really stay bought?