• One of the Paper’s best Columnists, Riley rehashes the Journal’s lame case against Trump’s latest migrant invasion measure
  • Dutifully Toes the Journal’s “Open Borders Line”

We’ve heard it before from the Wall Street Journal’s news pages and a majority of its editorial board. The Journal enthusiastically supports the U S Chamber of Commerce’s position in favor of unlimited illegal immigration to keep the flow of low wage workers coming.

Nevertheless it is kind of sad to see a columnist of Jason Riley’s stature join ranks with the Democrat left, business’ short-sighted aims, and the Never-Trumpers.

Riley’s latest column takes on the Administration’s idea to locate illegals into “sanctuary cities”. One of his WSJ “talking points”

– Correctly notes it is not only Democrats who have opposed Trump’s every effort to address our illegal immigration crisis; many Congressional Republicans have also and Obama-appointed members of the Judiciary; he might have added that the liberal media has done its utmost help the opposition; he might have mentioned that his own publication has been ‘all in’ as well.

– Riley points out, he thinks triumphantly, that “apprehended illegal immigrants are released into society while awaiting their court dates. He observes that Trump “complains” about it “regularly”.

Thus, Riley says, “shipping..(the migrants).. to sanctuary cities would only increase the odds that they don’t show up for their hearings. And…it will make those cities even more of a magnet for fake asylum seekers and others who shouldn’t be in the country.”

Sad that Riley can actually write that with a presumably straight face.

Come on, Jason! “Apprehended illegal immigrants”, everybody, including every would be migrant in the world, knows that only the tiniest percentage of these people show up for their hearings” now!

Furthermore, Mr. Riley, making this action a “magnet” for those “who shouldn’t be in the country” is the most creative and appealing reason for sending them to sanctuary cities. They are not a “magnet now because they’re getting a better deal with the current system. Now, they are “shipped” to locations all over the country, often without the knowledge of the cities getting them, and certainly not requiring any permission from those communities and consequently they are already almost certain to not “show up for their hearings”.

But more importantly, the “welcoming” sanctuary cities should experience first hand the consequences of their ‘compassion’ by sharing the overwhelming burden that they happily impose on the cities that don’t wish to be flooded by unlimited numbers of illegal immigrants, many unwilling to assimilate, or even learn the language of their ‘new home’.

How long do you suppose the ‘caring’ residents of this cities would be willing to tolerate the conditions that hordes of illegal immigrant would impose on the schools, hospitals and other facilities in their ‘warm and compassionate’ communities?

Surely, any American paying the mildest attention to this crisis finds the hypocrisy stunning on the part of the liberals of the sanctuary cities who tell us that illegal immigrants make communities safer, more economically vibrant , culturally exciting with the diversity they bring…just don’t bring them to our community!


It is notable that there are so few of the knowledgeable, patriotic folks in the Quad Cities and other parts well beyond that we count among our readers, who are willing to tell us their views on issues as important to the country.

Comments to V’pac are much more likely to be read and considered by more people than will your views as you share them with a few neighbors or the gang at your favorite Pub. Some readers have been intrigued by the comments that they’ve shared them on their Facebook or Twitter accounts. Well-informed conservatives out there could inspire a more visible Republican presence in the Quad Cities (and elsewhere).

(Your comments can be anonymous if you wish.)                          V’


This entry was posted in UNCATEGORIZED. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. George Carpenter Jr says:

    I always like what Jason Riley has to say. Having said that this last piece (WSJ Apr 17) left me a little disappointed. Yes, it is possible this is a “stunt” and it is also possible it is not a stunt. So, if this is a stunt, aka trial balloon where’s the harm? At least our President is trying different things to solve the problem. I see the logic in helping countries in Central America with aid, but I don’t see any results for the past millions we have sent there? I don’t really blame these people for trying to get a better life. I blame the ‘Dim-ocrats’ for their collusion and obfuscation. I blame Mexico as well for a large part of the problem. I also hope Jason can see the benefit of punishing sanctuary cities for their part in this mess?

    • Designated2 says:

      Well said and appreciated. It was a clunker of a column for Riley. Sorry your comment took so long to post but I missed the notice that comes of one pending.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *