Skip to comments.WSJ Attacks 'Blood-and-Soil' Republicans Over Opposition to Immigration Bill
Posted on 07/03/2013 6:36:09 PM PDT by drewh
The Wall Street Journal editorial page has attacked opposition to the immigration bill that passed in the Senate last week, urging the Republican-led House to "improve" the bill, "not kill it."
The bill's border security provisions, the Journal argued, were not weak, as conservatives had charged, but were "wretched excess," the result of "the Republican party letting its blood-and-soil wing trump its supposedly free-market principles." It might seem odd to attack "blood-and-soil" conservatives (a phrase of Nazi provenance, evidently) on the eve of July 4th. But one need not wave the American flag or protest the obviously offensive connotations of the insult to defeat the Journal's arguments for the Senate bill.
By arguing that economic growth should drive immigration reform, the Journal actually undermines the "Gang of Eight" legislation it attempts to defend.
The editorial states, up front, that its "preferred" option for immigration reform "would focus entirely on easing the way for more people to come legally."
Border security plays no role whatsoever in the Journal's considerations.
That is an astonishing position for a newspaper that has taken a strong stance in favor of the war on terror, including, recently, a strident defense of the National Security Agency's surveillance powers.
Furthermore, border security is not just about stopping terrorism. It is also about the rule of law. And the rule of law, in turn, is fundamental to economic growth. The Journal well understands that fact. It co-publishes an annual "Index of Economic Freedom" with the Heritage Foundation, in which "rule of law" is not just one of the criteria, but the first criterion for economic freedom, before limited government and open markets.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Kill the jobs/economy/sovereignty killing bill!!
A country without borders is a notion, not a nation
I feel like I’ve been stabbed in the back. Again. By another bunch of “conservatives”.
Looks like the cheap labor pimps are out today.
There are only 2 groups that will benefit from Amnesty
The Democrats and cheap labor pimps.
WSJ is calling conservatives against amnesty Nazis. It has officially jumped the shark.
As Mark Levin described the WSJ editors — “a-holes”.
So it’s the “Blood and Soil” bunch versus the “Lawn-Care and Housekeeping” faction.
Did all these stakeholders in amnesty threaten to cancel their subscriptions or something?
They know full well this is a sham and what the consequences to our nation will be. So it makes me wonder - if this is their position, can the reader trust what the WSJ says about money and markets?
Wall Street Journal is pro-cheap labor? Damn. What a shock.
Doubling the size of the Border Patrol won’t fix anything if the government enforces the new laws like they enforced the old ones. Illegal immigration is fueled by two factors; access to employment and low threat of deportation. Until we fix those two problems a 40,000 strong border patrol will have no effect.
Not really. The phrase "blood and soil" predates the Nazis, and I have on occasion over the years used it as a handy short-hand for the strain of American conservatism that sees American nationhood and American patriotism in terms more fitted to the nations of Old Europe in which ancestry and birth were the basis of nationhood, rather than fealty to the ideals of a constitutional order as is (or should be) the case for Americans. And, it is, indeed, that strain of conservatism which is most vocal against any amnesty for illegal immigrants -- though there are sound conservative arguments based on the rule of law for being against it as well.
Full disclosure: as FReepers with long memories know, I am dead set against any path to citizenship for willful violators of our immigration laws. As far as I'm concerned an amnesty into guest-worker status, or an amnesty into red card status (permanent residency with no way to attain citizenship) could be part of a grand reform including serious border enforcement, harsher penalties for knowingly or without due diligence employing illegal immigrants, a guest-worker program and adjustments to immigration quotas, but an amnesty onto track to citizenship is right out.
The WSJ nerds clearly haven’t had their kitty litter changed.
WSJ = Globalists.
Blood and Soil: Does that mean native folk who llove their land?
Well! WSJ you aren’t even free market. Any idiot knows that if you pump serf labor into a market that you’ve distorted that market.
at the July 4th GOP Picnic (Omaha, NE), I’ll be in attendance with a “NO AMNESTY” sign!!!! Might even take my Palin picture with me (2’ by 3’).
I was a regular subscriber to the WSJ until a few years ago. One of their contributing writer Thomas Frank extolled the virtues of Ayres and Dorhn. What crap. I have not read the paper nor purchased a copy since then
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.