Robert J. Samuelson: an Honest Voice
May 31, 2006, 03:51 PM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF
For quite some time it has been apparent that Robert J. Samuelson has been outstanding amongst those privileged to have Big Foot Columnist credentials because of his astuteness and candor on the Immigration issue. (The Gate Keepers mustn't have checked on that.)

His latest column What You Don't Know About the Immigration Bil,The Washington Post May 31 2006 is imperative reading (and dissemination) material for all those in the patriotic camp.

Samuelson's central thesis—that the Senate bill represents a substantial acceleration of immigration—is not news to regular VDARE.com readers, but doubtless is to most of his.

But what is especially valuable is his critique of the dishonesty of the MSM coverage of the Senate debate:

"The Senate passed legislation last week that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) hailed as "the most far-reaching immigration reform in our history." You might think that the first question anyone would ask is how much it would actually increase or decrease legal immigration. But no. After the Senate approved the bill by 62 to 36, you could not find the answer in the news columns of The Post, the New York Timesor the Wall Street Journal. Yet the estimates do exist..."

Samuelson is particularly irritated by the suppression of the Sessions/Rector news conference on the scale of the immigration increase:

On May 15 Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama held a news conference with Heritage's Rector to announce their immigration projections and the estimated impact on the federal budget. Most national media didn't report the news conference...

He has an explanation:

Whether or not the bias is "liberal," groupthink is a powerful force in journalism. Immigration is considered noble. People who critically examine its value or worry about its social effects are subtly considered small-minded, stupid or bigoted. The result is selective journalism that reflects poorly on our craft...

Perhaps this is plausible as far as the line journalists are concerned. But why do the editors permit it?

This is not the last word on the Bush 2006 Opening-the-Borders drive. But it is a fair start.