New York Times headline, Feb. 14: “How Senate Democrats Flipped the Border Issue on Republicans.”
The headline asserts (as the Times would put it, without evidence, you f-cking liars!), that Democrats have succeeded at having “flipped the border issue on Republicans.” In other words, something that was previously a political detriment to Democrats is now the opposite.
Who says that? Not a single poll demonstrates that voters are suddenly sympathetic to Democrats on immigration, given that they caused the calamity, and none are cited by the author, Carl Hulse (an always reliable relayer of Democrat talking points).
The Times: “‘We had an epiphany — sort of, lightning strikes,’ Mr. Schumer recalled in an interview,” wrote Hulse, referring to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. “‘Do border. If we did it right and were tough about it, it’s a win for us. And it helps us with Ukraine because so many of our people care about Ukraine, they will vote for a good border bill.'”
Ah, OK. So this entire article comes from the perspective of the top Democrat in Congress, Schumer, but Hulse readily used his own name and the weight of the Times’ credibility to co-sign Schumer’s agenda as fact. Schumer wants the public to believe that he and his party were willing to get “tough” and “right” on the border, so he simply tells Hulse that’s the case, and Hulse prints it word for word without question because, incidentally, it’s what Hulse and the Times want as well.
The Times: “The final package notably did not contain new border security provisions, after Senate conservatives opted to kill that element of the legislation despite their initial insistence that it be included. … Enough Republicans — 22 in the end — were unwilling to desert Ukraine, and many of them believed that Mr. Schumer and his fellow Democrats had made a good-faith effort to strike a border security deal that was sabotaged by members of their own party.”
How Schumer’s communications director must have smiled while reading those lines. It’s a script straight from Schumer’s office, with some assistance from Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has made clear time and time again that he has no interest in halting the flow of illegal immigrants coming across the border by the hundreds of thousands. For them, plus the media, even talking about the border is a condescending courtesy they granted solely to snatch more money to send to Ukraine.
“Senate conservatives” never killed anything “despite their initial insistence that it be included.” They were, in fact, never offered anything that they and a majority of voters insisted upon, which was simply a shutdown of impoverished and criminal migrants dumping themselves into taxpayer care. Instead of offering that very uncomplicated fix, Senate Democrats, plus McConnell, counter-offered some 2 million illegal border crossers permitted into the U.S. per year, plus special powers for the president to raise that cap as he sees fit.
It would be like asking your server for a burger, and he instead offers a foul egg salad. As you walk out unsatisfied, the server then curses you for neglecting to buy anything.
But he sure flipped the script!
The Times: “Democrats would be able to say they tried and point to the Republican opposition for failing to halt a surge of migrants illegally crossing the U.S. border with Mexico.”
It’s not like Schumer needed to tell Hulse any of this for him to have understood the plan. Everyone knew this was what Democrats would do — offer a “border bill” that they then instruct the media to refer to as “strict” and “severe” (which Hulse dutifully did) and then feign shock when Republican voters reject it for being unserious.
The Times: “Still, members of both parties credited Mr. Schumer for deftly playing a hand that insulated Democrats from a backlash to the collapse, provided a political defense on border policy and still allowed him and a bipartisan coalition of senators to salvage the Ukraine aid.”
By “salvage the Ukraine aid,” Hulse means that the Senate passed a bill for more Ukraine money, which, chances are, will die in the House (but don’t hold your breath). This, in short, portrays Schumer and Democrats as legislative masters when neither they nor Republicans have secured what either side wants. (Admittedly, Democrats are somewhat better off because while they care a little about refilling Ukraine’s slush fund, they are deadly earnest in ensuring that the border here stays just the way it is.)
For more lies, read the full Times article here.
