predictable op-ed appearing \u00a0in the Wall Street Journal<\/i><\/a> \u00a0on June 18.\u00a0 Advocates organized by professional lobbyists and political professionals go on auto-pilot pushing an agreed upon line without regard to changed circumstances or the latest information and wind up looking absurd.<\/p>\nThe Murdoch piece reflects the overall editorial position of the Wall Street Journal<\/i> (which isn\u2019t surprising, considering he owns the paper): Reward illegal immigration, take limits off most immigration categories, otherwise companies will leave the U.S. In short, Murdoch\u2019s views reflect those of Wall Street generally that our economy can only be saved with greater amounts of mass immigration, Americans aren\u2019t of much use any more for much of anything\u2026.it goes on and on.<\/p>\n
The problem is Murdoch\u2019s piece looks like it was written in early 2013 by PR people working for him and fellow billionaire Michael Bloomberg<\/a>, who co-founded the mass immigration advocacy group, Partnership for a New American Economy<\/a>. The op-ed makes no specific reference to the bill and, other than a few lines mentioning Cantor\u2019s defeat, it seems like it\u2019s in some sort of time-warp, pretending that if Congress will just \u201cfix the system,\u201d all will be well.<\/p>\nWhen professional lobbyists and PR firms are retained for special interest purposes, they continue to push a line without regard to public perception or changed circumstances.\u00a0 As I said on Fox News on Thursday, there are three basic problems with the Murdoch premise.\u00a0 1. We have an administration that openly sabotages immigration enforcement; 2. The Senate bill won\u2019t fix any of these problems \u2013 indeed they will become worse; and 3. Our Southern border is in crisis now in part because of all the years of amnesty talk. Watch the clip below.<\/p>\n