More Misinformation from the Media:
Give me your extreme-vetted, your ideologically certified, your elite. Send only the smartest, the best connected, the richest to our shores. No losers, no free thinkers, and no ugly people please. . . . In the hate speech that Donald Trump gave on immigration in Phoenix . . . he all but deported the Statue of Liberty, laying out the darkest visions of the American experience . . . it got rave reviews from neo-Nazi and Ku Klux Klan supporters. . . . At the door of Trump’s America, he would “select immigrants based on their likelihood, and their ability to be financially self-sufficient.” — The Immigrants Turned Away, The Opinion Pages, The New York Times, Timothy Eagan, 9/2/16
Fact Check: So what is so terrible—or indeed hateful—about selecting immigrants “based on their likelihood, and their ability to be self-sufficient”? If one accepts the premise that we can’t feasibly admit the hundreds of millions of people who would like to move here, then it follows that we have to impose limits which accept some and exclude others. And in that case, why not try to select for those who will benefit our society rather than burden it?
Such reason, sadly, makes little impression on people who emote about immigration with a quasi-religious fervor. Their sentimental cultism regards the Statue of Liberty as a goddess idol which demands an unending flow of “wretched refuse” and “huddled masses” from abroad. These cultists seem to fancy themselves as warm-hearted and oh-so-generous humanitarians.
Their warmth, however, doesn’t extend one iota to huddled masses of their fellow American citizens who yearn to breathe free from mass immigration. This particularly applies to America’s poor and disadvantaged who bear the brunt of competition from immigrants for jobs and social services. Do the tony journalists of America care about their plight or even notice it? Most commonly they don’t, as they dwell secluded on their islands of social privilege, intoxicated by their delusions of moral grandeur.
If they think about average Americans at all, it’s usually to discredit their concerns as those of klansmen and Nazis—as if these miniscule and marginal groups had any influence or standing among Americans. If Eagan and his ilk are really concerned about “dark visions” on immigration, they might check out the agendas of well-funded Latino supremacist organizations like the National Council of La Raza (the Race). Or they might consider the aims of left-wing extremists who view immigration as a means to destabilize American society. Or they might shine a light on the business interests that profiteer from immigrants’ of cheap labor.
One thing that may keep them from doing the latter is that those business interests often support the media with their advertising. Our morally superior journalists have something to lose if they bite this hand that feeds them—and nothing to lose if they bash Americans who suggest reasonable limits on immigration.