Thread: Laura Ingraham battles WSJ, Wills, Williams and Wallace on immigration reform

February 9, 2014
Devonia Smith
examiner.com


Photo by Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images

Feb. 9, 2014, on "Fox News Sunday," radio talk show host Laura Ingraham battled "The Wall Street Journal," George Wills, Juan Williams and host Chris Wallace on behalf of the voices of throngs of "Tea Party Republicans," in the ongoing immigration reform debate. Outnumbered four to one, Chris Wallace offered Ingraham a "penalty next Sunday." Laura responded, "I'll take it."

Clearly exasperated, at one point Laura directly challenged George Wills, asking, "Do you care about American workers at all and their jobs and their wages, and their dream?" Ingraham served as the single voice for millions of conservatives who vehemently oppose any policies which even hint of amnesty for immigrants who are in America illegally without border enforcement.

These millions also oppose policies failing to consider the impact of massive immigration increases on jobs as well as what they consider a need for all immigrants to "assimilate," to adopt traditional American values, allegiances and cultural identities.

A moment of brevity in an otherwise heated debate came after Juan Williams attempted to defend President Obama for saving "grandmothers and kids" from deportation. Laura blasted him for offering an "emotional argument." Williams threw up his hands, saying, "I'd rather have George argue with her."

George Wills addressed Laura, "The problem here, is, Republican political imperatives are pretty clear and in my judgment, this will horrify Laura, diametrically opposed to the national interest, which is in considerable more immigration."

Laura responded after Wallace used an excerpt from a recent "Wall Street Journal" publication to support immigration as good for the GOP:

"The result of doing nothing will be a de facto amnesty, in which 11 million illegal immigrants will continue to work using fake documents. Mr. Obama will look for ways to grant more of them legal status using executive power and the GOP will look even more on welcoming the minorities."

"'The Wall Street Journal' is on the side of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Pat Leahy and La Raza. Talk radio, for the most part, is on the side of yes, Heritage, probably other Tea Party type groups, most Republican senators and congressmen, I think, and the lion's share of the American people," explained Laura, adding, "The WSJ should put down their dog-eared copy of "Fountainhead" and actually live in the real world where people's wages are flat-lining,"

Laura maintained there was no will to enforce immigration laws currently on the books or any future laws made, wrapping her complaint up by pointing out that the president was "apparently" untrustworthy because Obama had already changed law with a stroke of his handy pen by deferring action for over a million people here illegally. Ingraham scathingly added, "Apparently, Republicans don't have a problem with it."

All in for immigration reform, Wills wouldn't buy into Laura's stance that lack of jobs and high American worker unemployment was an issue that should enter into the debate. The debate, in his opinion, should be focused upon economical "growth," plus an influx of workers needed to pay for the benefits of "10,000 babyboomers everyday becoming eligible for Social Security and Medicare." In the vein of "growth" Wills praised the "entrepreneurial" spirit of immigrants , saying, he wanted more of those kind of people.

Earlier this week, after releasing a document outlining the principles of immigration reform the GOP was considering, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R) released the following statement: "There's widespread doubt about whether this administration can be trusted to enforce our laws. And it's going to be difficult to move any immigration legislation until of that change.

Without Republican support from the House, any hope for immigration reform has essentially stumbled, at least until after the 2014 election primaries, when Republicans are rumored to be planning to give it another try when it won't be so dangerous to those seeking reelection. Speaking to David Gregory on NBC's "Meet the Press" today, Senator Chuck Schumer (D) suggested if Republicans don't trust Obama, they could pass a bill but make it effective in 2017 after Obama left office.

http://www.examiner.com/article/laur...gration-reform

Video at the source link.
~~~

Laura Ingraham battles George Will as conservative civil war over immigration intensifies

1:55 PM 02/09/2014
Brendan Bordelon
The Daily Caller

Conservative commentators Laura Ingraham and George Will can usually be counted on to agree on most issues, but on “Fox News Sunday,” the two sparred over immigration reform, an issue threatening to rip apart the uneasy alliance between the traditional and libertarian wings of the Republican Party.

Fox host Chris Wallace began the discussion — which also included AP reporter Julie Pace and liberal commentator Juan Williams — by noting that Republican leadership seems to be rethinking the wisdom of partnering with President Obama on comprehensive immigration reform. Many conservative bulwarks — including the Wall Street Journal — argued that avoiding immigration reform would hurt the economy and make the GOP appear unwelcoming to minorities.

“The Wall Street Journal attacked, in that editorial, talk radio and the people rising up against this, and John Boehner cowering,” Ingraham began. “As far as I can tell, the Wall Street Journal is on the side of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Pat Leahy and La Raza. Talk radio, for the most part, is on the side of, yes, Heritage, probably other Tea Party-type groups, most Republican senators and congressmen and I think the lion’s share of the American people.”

“So I’m gonna frame that editorial from the Wall Street Journal. I think they should put down their dog-eared copy of ‘The Fountainhead,’ and actually live in the real world where people’s wages are falling,” she said, taking a subtle swipe at libertarian Republicans infatuated with the Ayn Rand novel. She went on to note the “middle ground on immigration is enforcement,” bemoaning a lack of border control and laws that allow illegal immigrants to receive special benefits.

Will claimed that Ingraham’s points are moot due to the country’s particular “need” for immigration reform.

“The welfare state NEEDS its workforce replenished,” he argued. “As the elderly retire, ten thousand baby boomers become eligible every day for Social Security and Medicare. Second, there’s an intense global competition for human capital, and we’re losing out on that. Third, to immigrate is to make an entrepreneurial act. It’s to uproot yourself and perhaps your family and take a risk, and those are the kinds of people –”

At that point, Ingraham felt compelled to interrupt:

INGRAHAM: Do we care about American workers at all? And their jobs, and their wages and their dreams?

WILL: Laura, you’re the one who’s arguing the AFL-CIO argument, which is –

INGRAHAM: They’re for it!

WILL: No, but they’re for it with so many caveats they nullify it.

INGRAHAM: But why have borders?

WILL: You’re arguing the zero-sum game –

INGRAHAM: No.

WILL: When, in the lives of our children and grandchildren, there are 500 million Americans, they’re all going to be working! Because we’re gonna have economic dynamism, aided by immigration!

INGRAHAM: So the argument, though, leads to, ‘Why have borders at all?’ Why have a border if it’s just about people as widgets, who come in and are workers without really a concern about assimilation, without concern about how it affects people in middle America. I mean, a lot of people who are in favor of [immigration reform] don’t send their kids to public schools, are not affected by illegal immigration at all.

But I would submit that there are people who are watching this show right now who are screaming at the top of their lungs saying, ‘Who is Washington is representing my interests?’ The labor shortage argument that Paul Ryan is making, that we have an impending labor shortage — I think, transparently, it is ridiculous to most people, today. We don’t have participation in the workforce as it is!

WILL: It’s not a shortage. It’s growth we want!

Ingraham later added that, “There’s no will to enforce the border, there is no faith in this administration to do it, and the Republican elites and the Democratic elites agree, and the people are revolting across this country.”

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/09/la...nsifies-video/

All in for immigration reform, Wills wouldn't buy into Laura's stance that lack of jobs and high American worker unemployment was an issue that should enter into the debate. The debate, in his opinion, should be focused upon economical "growth," plus an influx of workers needed to pay for the benefits of "10,000 babyboomers everyday becoming eligible for Social Security and Medicare." In the vein of "growth" Wills praised the "entrepreneurial" spirit of immigrants , saying, he wanted more of those kind of people.

Will's seem to know nothing about illegal immigrants, in his mind poor under educated people equal growth, that idea alone is so stupid to argue with him is insane. The idea that illegals will make enough to pay taxes under current laws is also stupid, the answer is clear those who want open borders love cheap/slave labor and do not care for the American worker....