Thursday, October 21, 2010

Editor hates babies too, but knows it's a waste of time

The unnamed Courier editor doesn't have a problem with the logic of denying birthright citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, citing the myth of "monumental costs" to society to support illegals and those children (who as citizens are as entitled to public services as regular white folk). He just doesn't think it can work legally.

The editor utterly fails to see that the phony "immigration" issue, including this push by the far right to punish children for the status of their parents, is nothing more than a strategy to win elections. These candidates don't hold any delusions about following through on their rhetoric, they know it won't hold up legally. They just know that if you get people scared and angry enough, you'll win the power game.

It would be so refreshing to see an occasional editorial that looks beyond the current teevee narrative to consider the real costs of what too many politicians and public pundits are saying. Please, editor, try to give these issues some genuine hard thought before you sit down to dash off another 300 words.

PS: "Ditch drive"? What's that supposed to mean?


Justin Rains said...

I think it's ditch, as in stop, and drive, as in effort. So it'd be "Stop the effort to change..." but there were probably space issues, etc.

Steven Ayres said...

You're clearly a charitable man, Justin.

Candace said...

Yes, "ditch," v. imperative; "drive," n. dir. obj. See, in Russian we wouldn't even be having this discussion, cause endings always tell who's doing what to whom. (Well, almost always.)

However, I like the possibility of there being a new piece of electronic hardware, the ditch drive. Maybe, with one of those, we could tell how much water the ranchers over in the Verde Valley are diverting from the river every season.