If The Libertarian Left Condemns Trump’s Immigration Record, It Must Be Quite Good

Democrats, Donald Trump, IMMIGRATION, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Political Philosophy

Who do you turn to for accurate, objective data on just how relatively effective President Trump’s immigration initiatives have been?

You turn to a source that is both quite credible and, at once, opposes Trump’s immigration policies with all its open-borders, ideological zeal.

That’s not the Left, for its data are seldom credible; it’s the libertarian-left, and in particular, a policy report from the CATO Institute, whose scholars are eagerly awaiting the  “Pro-Immigration Agenda [of] the Biden Administration”:

If the libertarian-left condemns Trump’s immigration record—it must have been quite good.

CATO predicts Biden will please them, because:

… At no time in American history has immigration been as legally restricted as it is currently. Trump has overseen a reduction in legal immigration greater than the declines during the two world wars, the Great Depression, or even after Congress ended America’s open immigration policy with Europe in the 1920s. President-elect Biden could do more to expand, improve, and deregulate the immigration system than any other president if for no other reason than that the system is largely shut down right now. …

Before Trump closed the borders, the United States legally accepted more immigrants than any other country in absolute terms, but accounting for its size and economy, it ranked in the bottom third of wealthy countries for both its foreign-born share of the population and its annual per capita growth in the foreign-born population in 2019. Immigrants in Canada are about 21 percent of its population….

Less credible are the polls the CATOites cite to the effect that, “for the first time in [a certain] poll’s 55-year history, more Americans support increasing immigration than decreasing it.”

Really? At a time when Americans can be found congregating by necessity outside food banks, in lines stretching as far as the eye can see? Now, Americans badly want more competition over scarce resources?

Yes, say our CATO “scholars.”

MORE.

*Image credit.

On Motherhood

Debt, Ethics, Family, Gender, Kids, Morality

Via LinkedIn (where you can join me, too):

On being a mother: A little long, but still achingly poignant. Every single mother can identify:

Related reading is “Are you My Mother?”

Emily Wilson, a classicist, offers these insights:

“There is a deeply rooted idea in our culture that mothers, far more than fathers, are responsible not just for picking up the toys and changing the nappies, but also for how the child turns out in the end, for good or ill.”

Ms. Wilson’s conclusion:

“Mothers are all different, because they are all human. The good enough mother is one who gives her child what it needs to grow up. The good enough child is one who manages to grow up, and in doing so, is able to recognize her mother’s humanity.”

 

Turning Point USA’s Bread-And-Circuses Conservatism

Celebrity, Communism, Conservatism, Intelligence, Kids, Political Economy, Political Philosophy, Republicans, Socialism

Faced with urban unrest, government that will never be limited again, institutionalized antiwhite hatred (it’s not identity politics, Candace Owens, it’s anti-white politics) and the attendant endemic violence, not to mention financial collapse—Turning Point USA has only a “bread and circuses” conservatism to offer conservative kids attending a Student Action Summit.

With respect to TPUSA vaporizing about socialism constantly, the kids should consider this warning  (from “Wake Up. Systemic Anti-Whiteness Is Deadly. Witness South Africa,” October 15, 2020):

“Dissecting and decrying communism is an ideological luxury, the province of relatively wealthy, stable, developed democracies.”—ILANA Mercer

When your society is overrun by barbarians, socialism will be the last thing you’ll be sitting down to bargain for with your captives.

Fake News USA Assert The Security Of The Election System, BUT Refuse To Investigate It

Argument, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Journalism, Media, Reason, Technology

CNN’s Jeremy Diamond and his American circle-jerk of progressive, activist reporters ought to take lessons from BBC’s James Clayton, of “Click,” a BBC program.

Six minutes and 12 seconds into the clip on digital voting, the coverage of “serious security issues” begins. Techies who’ve “reversed engineered voting systems” are worried.

BBC News clearly still does the job Fake News USA refuses to do: investigate the security of the election system, not simply assert it.

Jeremy Diamond, a specimen in the national, journalistic circle jerk, is CNN’s White House correspondent. He’s a reporter, not an opinion-purveyor. Yet opinion is what he and his cohort purvey.

While reporting, Diamond will constantly express his opinion by exclaiming how “remarkable” and “outlandish” it is that President Trump wishes to overturn “a democratically held election.”

Breathy exclamations of disgust, surprise and frustration have no place in the repertoire of a reporter. It’s one thing, moreover, had CNN and Mr. Diamond investigated the election-fraud claims wending their way through the Courts—there are constitutional violations uninvestigated by them, too. But they don’t. The aforementioned BBC program, Click, clearly has no issue investigating and concluding that digital voting, for one, is fraught.

Had the American media done the work required; then they could legitimately say, “Having investigated and reported on the election fraud allegation, we find that there is no …”

But Diamond and his CNN crooks do not argue their case; they use their powerful positions in front of the camera to assert their claims, relying on viewers not to know the difference.

The same can be said of every other reporter on the CNN and MSNBC Fake News makers. They all offer their opinions on panels of opinionaters and from the field. Abby Phillip is another young journalist like Diamond who does opinion, not reporting.