The New York Times editorial page has an editorial which is rather insulting to those who don't like the Senate Bill on immigration.The Times says:
The Senate has given the cause of immigration reform a lot of momentum, which it will need since it is now heading for a brick wall: the House of Representatives.
The House Judiciary Committee chairman, James Sensenbrenner Jr., in the role of head brick, called the Senate bill "a nonstarter" the morning after it passed.
and this gem from the Times:
Many polls show that the American public has moved decisively toward favoring a comprehensive immigration solution: tightening security and giving illegal immigrants a chance to seek the burdens and benefits of citizenship. But those in the Sensenbrenner camp are clinging to a fantasy that only a clenched fist will set the nation's immigrant problems right. They have refused to treat illegal immigrants as anything but outlaws, and oppose the Senate bill's citizenship path. They speak with the sullen defeatism of those who have dug into their positions and can't climb out.
It is hard to understand what -— besides election-year pandering and xenophobic hostility - motivates their unwillingness to bend toward the flexible, sensible policy that immigrants, their families and their advocates, many business organizations and labor unions, and a majority of the Senate are seeking.
Do you like that Orwellian comment "illegal immigrants as anything but outlaws" ? If you are doing something illegally doesn't that make you an outlaw? But,near the end of the piece is the arrogance one expects from the Times:
To the reality-based community, thankfully, the Senate bill is not a nightmare.
The New York Times editorial page really doesn't understand how outside the mainstream of American life they really are.Unlike the Times editorial crew,most Americans don't take public transportation to work,most Americans have a Wal-Mart near by,most Americans can own a gun,and most Americans don't pay sky-high property taxes and then send their kids to private schools after writing editorials about how government should increase spending on education.When the New York Times talks about "reality-based" community watch out.
