Exposing the Wall Street Journal's demise

I used to subscribe to the Wall Street Journal. I let my subscription expire a couple of months ago. I'm thankful I did. This editorial is an example of why I left the WSJ. The editorial opens by saying "House Republicans are marking up articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and the question is why? As much as we share the frustration with the Biden border mess, impeaching Mr. Mayorkas won’t change enforcement policy and is a bad precedent that will open the gates to more cabinet impeachments by both parties."

Apparently, the WSJ Editorial Board hasn't figured it out that there's value in using the Mayorkas impeachment and trial as a way to remind voters what Biden's policies are. When the impeachment trial starts, Washington shuts down for the trial. It's literally the only show in town in terms of politics. Picture GOP surrogates hitting social media to remind voters how Secretary Mayorkas and Joe Biden didn't just open the border but refused to obey the laws.

Remind voters that Joe Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have blood on their hands and that Democrats didn't lift a finger until property was trampled, young lives had been lost and border cities' funds had gotten depleted thanks to the overflow of illegal immigrants.

WSJ goes soft

Check this out:

A better idea is to strike a deal with Mr. Biden on serious border-security reforms that would restrict his discretion on parole, rewrite the asylum standard, and give the executive other tools to control the border. If Messrs. Mayorkas and Biden refuse to use them, the GOP will have an election issue. And the tools will be there for the next President to use.
News organizations, like detectives, are supposed to notice things. The WSJ Editorial Board apparently didn't notice that Joe Biden isn't interested in negotiating in good faith about border security. He wants the borders to stay open. He just wants to be seen as doing something. Biden's administration isn't interested in changing the status quo.

To use a phrase that the late, great Charles Krauthammer coined, the WSJ "just isn't cynical enough." Thinking that today's Democrats are interested in good governance is as foolish as thinking there's a possibility of the sun setting in the east.

Speaker Johnson Speaks Truth to Biden

It's time for the MSM to stop pretending that Biden is an honest politician. That's proof of the MSM's dishonesty. Unfortunately, the WSJ has become part of the problem.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more