Tony Blankley, the editorial page editor of the Washington Times, usually has something interesting to say. Here he weighs in on the immigration controversy. He asks a question that certainly must have occurred to most of us: if we are to have open borders, why only Mexicans? Why indeed? Some sample paragraphs from his article:
It is almost inconceivable that an argument is taken seriously that we don't have the right to secure our borders and determine who shall enter our country. Not only has such lunacy become respectable, but our mainstream media instantly, instinctively embraces such a postion. . . But why stop with 85 million Mexicans. For the open-border crowd -- which apparently includes virtually the entire American political, media, academic and business establishment -- there is no reason to try to keep out anyone who wants to come in. . .
There are still about 700 million Chinese peasants waiting impatiently for a decent job; probably about an equal number of Indians. And most of the African continent could surely live better in Phoenix than they do being butchered in genocidal wars or starving in man-induced famines.
What is the moral basis for discriminating against that part of suffering humanity unlucky enough to find itself not sharing a border with the good old US of A? Perhaps the Dubai port company could start chartering ships to bring the rest of suffering humanity to our shores. . .
You can't do satire in a lunatic asylum or in present-day American politics.