The End of the Wall Street Journal?

FrontPageMagazine ^ | Robert Locke

[Tuor]

WSJ has been overtaken by the Neocons. This is the result.

Tuor

[Twodees]

Thanks for the ping. I haven't bought a copy of the WSJ since the late '80s. The author confirms that I needn't have renewed the subscription.

[ctdonath2]

What a pathetic case of bait-and-switch. The title has nothing to do with 98% of the article, which is an anti-immigrant tirade. The author is disengenuous, claiming the end of an institution based on a single article, and not observing that the WSJ does indeed print articles from a variety of points of view.

Viva la WSJ!

[habs4ever]

Gigot ,I fear, has a tendency to want to be liked too much by the forces of evil.So he'll bend over backwards to appear to be inclusionary, optimistic, forward looking, etc... all the cliches that Happy Republican warriors like Jack Kemp espouse...just for fear of being labelled a 'hater".It gets tiresome when growth Republicans don't have enough confidence in their economic ideas that they somehow equate limited immigration with a betrayal of America's promise and reduced economic prosperity for all.His stance reeks of a cynical utilitarianism that better suits the Left.

[OK]

Investor's Business Daily still has some pretty good editorial pieces.

Any successful media company will eventually be taken over by the corporate elite. Then they will begin the conversion to leftist views.

This happens repeatedly. U.S. News and World Report was delightful back in the 70's, now it is the same as Newsweek and Time. Reader's Digest was bought out, and now is just another leftist tool, IMHO. The same will eventually happen to Fox News. It will even happen to FreeRepublic.com without ironclad ownership and control by people like the Robinsons.

[ex-snook]

"WSJ has been overtaken by the Neocons. This is the result. "

Yep, so has the Republican party. Both are now 'of the internationalists, by the internationalists, and for the internationalists'.

The concept of 'American' citizens is fading, soon only 'corporate' citizens of the World. Trade agreements are replacing the Constitution. Both parties are silent.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Not sure when they started doing so, but for many years the WSJ editorial page has advocated a constitutional amendment reading simply, "There shall be open borders."

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Thanks for the ping

[pittsburgh gop guy]

I thank God everyday for the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, except on weekends - when they don't publish, and also on Thursdays - when they publish Al Hunt's column!

[aculeus]

I've been a subscriber for quite a while now and I've not noticed a decrease in the quality of their editorial writing. OTOH I've noticed a quite marked increase in left-leaning bias in their DC political news. David Rogers (an Al Hunt protege I'm sure) invariably writes with a pro-Dem slant.

The WSJ news reporters have always had a left-wing slant.

For example, the two females who wrote that scurrilous book on Clarence Thomas were alumnae of WSJ news department.

They still have the best editorial page in existence.

[1rudeboy]

Gigot is one of the best analytical writers out there. He expressed his opinion, so what? Locke might have gotten his panties in a wad enough to write an anti-immigrant diatribe, but since when has the WSJ editorial staff counted themselves among the let's-build-a-moat America First!'ers? It's a business publication, for criss'sake. Since when has business shunned cheap labor?

And incidentally, one of the only places you will see a let's-build-a-moat opinion is on a WSJ Op-Ed page.

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

"Gigot is desperate. He must, as the newly appointed leader of the globalist clique at the Journal editorial page, defend globalism’s marquee issue: mass immigration. But he must do so without any good arguments, for there are none."

VT, He damn sure got that right on. It's the same for proponents of unlimited immigration even on such a well reasoned venues as Free Republic. All they can do is pigenhole people and call them names. Peace and love, George.

[mafree]

Thanks for the flag- I haven't been reading the WSJ a lot over the last few years but the article may just be speaking to something that's happening all over.

[Tuor]

Yep, so has the Republican party. Both are now 'of the internationalists, by the internationalists, and for the internationalists'.

Once upon a time, I was pretty strongly Republican. That time passed a while back. As Alan Keyes said (I believe): I did not leave the Republican Party, it left me.

As I am a man of conscience who does not believe in giving in to political expediency when choosing a candidate, I now only vote for that individual who best supports my views and is, I believe, of the highest moral character. If I have to choose between moral character and political views (not bloody likely), then I pick moral character: I can vote for a man I disagree with, but not one I can't trust.

Tuor

[SamAdams76]

While I agree that the Op-Ed section of the WSJ is not all that it could be, it is still an excellent paper overall. It is an eclectic mix of hard business news and offbeat stories you simply cannot find elsewhere. There is rarely an issue in which there is not at least one front page story that fascinates me. Like today in which we find the state of Mississippi paying for empty jail cells.

If there is a good editorial that day, then I consider it a bonus.

[abigail2]

BUMP

[Pelham]

. For the Journal is rapidly metamorphosing into the propaganda organ (Reason magazine being the theoretical journal) of conservatism’s glib counterfeit: corporate globalism. This is opposed to socialist globalism, to be sure, but it is not conservative of anything except property, and in the long run not even of that.

That about sums it up.

[M. Thatcher]

Absurd argument. Gigot hasn't even taken over the editorial page yet, and won't begin until the 17th. He reports to Bob Bartley for a full year before he takes the reins. The author of this piece (ably) deconstructs a single Gigot opinion piece, and pronounces the death of a publication whose editorial page Gigot isn't even yet managing? Idiotic.

Front Page can only dream of the day that it might garner a twentieth of the Journal's readership and influence.

[VinnyTex]

Not really. The Wall Street Journal has called for a constitutional amendment for open borders... They have. Saw Robert Bartley say it myself on CNBC...

I mean, they're not patriotic Americans IMHO... Even National Review has called the Journal the Non-Patriotic Right