February 13, 2016

"Over the years, Mrs. Clinton has shown an unfortunate tendency to oscillate between harshness and compassion on immigration questions."

"She seems to reach instinctively for the tougher-sounding policy before coming around, eventually, to positions that more closely reflect American ideals of welcome — ideals that Mr. Sanders voiced fluently on Thursday night."

From a NYT editorial, "Mrs. Clinton’s Mixed Immigration Message."

Ironically, Mrs. Clinton is closely reflecting American ideals. These ideals are mixed and not unalloyed welcome. Americas do endlessly oscillate between harshness and compassion. I can see finding Clinton's instincts unpleasantly complicated and unbeautiful, but these instincts are also our own.

The analogy that springs to my mind is LBJ looking at a portrait of himself and condemning it as "the ugliest thing I ever saw."

By the way, here's a 2004 clip of Hillary Clinton staunchly defending marriage as a sacred bond between a man and a woman:

This is a certain kind of politician. LBJ was that kind. Can we give the trimmers some respect?

Trimmers? Remember Camille Paglia used that word to insult Hillary Clinton? I've got to do a separate post about "trimmers" as a pejorative and how it can be seen as a positive. After I called attention to Paglia's use of the word, I got some excellent email on that topic. But let me take that up in a separate post.


Michael K said...

I think the correct terms "pathological liar."

Terry said...

"Ironically, Mrs. Clinton is closely reflecting American ideals. These ideals are mixed and not unalloyed welcome."
Not even mixed. We are talking about illegal immigration. The Times pretends that there is no such thing, only 'immigrants'.
If they were welcome, they wouldn't be here illegally, just as no one who is welcome is trespassing. The Times is incoherent and insane on the topic.

traditionalguy said...

To have a border or not to have a border, that is the question, said Trump, Prince of New Amsterdam. That was after he said something is rotten in DC.

Robert Cook said...

The Peter Hurd portrait of LBJ is pretty bad, and pretty ugly.

I can't imagine what LBJ's objections might have been to the Rockwell portrait, which is quite good.

David Begley said...

NYT. "They generally agree that President Obama’s enforcement policies have been too harsh, and they promise to do more than he did to help immigrants live and work without fear of deportation."

Too harsh? Estimated 11m-30m illegally in the US. That could be 10% of the total US population.

What is the limited principle on immigration for the NYT? I hear things are terrible in Africa, China and India. Why doesn't the NYT sponsor a program and start flying in a million illegals each month? It would help the economy!

Those hypocrites. The day Frank Bruni and David Brooks are fired and replaced by an illegal alien is the day I will take the NYT seriously. At least the writing would be better.

Gahrie said...

These ideals are mixed and not unalloyed welcome. Americas do endlessly oscillate between harshness and compassion.

I would say that the american people swing between compassion and the realization that we need to assimilate the recent wave of immigration.

We have also deported large number of illegal Hispanic immigrants from time to time, sometimes at the request of the Mexican government.

We have also banned entire categories of immigrants, usually Asians, but on at least one occasion, Arabs.

This idea that America has continuously had an open door policy is just ignorance.

Robert Cook said...

I just did a very quick check on Google of other paintings by Hurd--who married into the venerated Wyeth family, by the way--and ALL his paintings have the same look to them. To me, they're BAD. I'm curious how he got the commission to paint LBJ in the first place.

The Bergall said...

Why do we have laws in the first place......?

EDH said...

Isn't keeping faith with those who observe US law when they immigrate to the US legally the most welcoming as well as resolute position one can take?

wildswan said...

Trimmer, balance of power, pander, flip-flopper, two-faced, diplomatic, hypocritical, balanced-thoughtful,

If you try to retain mental freedom in a highly polarized discussion about new issues - you are balanced

If you try to avoid triggering nuclear war by rash talk, you are diplomatic

If you resist totalitarians by alliances even with distasteful dictators you doing balance of power.

But if you say whatever will win votes, cozy up to the money wherever it is, take bribes, ignore, even compromise, national security in order to cover-up for taking bribes, trash the women your husband raped and the girls he sexually exploited, agree to unrestricted immigration which takes jobs from blacks while promising to help blacks, agree to less policing in super-dangerous black areas while promising to help blacks, support Planned Parenthood's genocidal reduction in the black birth rate while promising to help blacks, steal delegates in primary elections, accuse a man who honeymooned by choice in Stalin's Russia of being a Republican, then the name for you is "Clinton." An un-gendered noun indicating total corruption on all fronts, on all issues, at all times.

PB said...

In that clip of Hillary, it's clear she doesn't speak with conviction and is merely repeating the words before her. This seems to be her core philosophy: she believes in nothing except having equal wealth of the people she's begged money from to get elected. In fact, she wants to have more than any of them so no matter what they'll respect her as their better.

AReasonableMan said...

Althouse said...
Ironically, Mrs. Clinton is closely reflecting American ideals. ... Americas do endlessly oscillate between harshness and compassion. I can see finding Clinton's instincts unpleasantly complicated and unbeautiful, but these instincts are also our own.

This is also true, sadly, in her foreign policy. She is a mirror rather than an ideologue.

traditionalguy said...

But Hillary is claiming her reward for enabling Bill Clinton all these years. And nobody cares on long remembers Bill Clinton's talents. Least of all, Mullah Obama and the Persian Mafia.

Hillary's last Hurrah is Bill's third term. Colonel Sanders would be Obama's third term. But Trumps first term is in the way.

Mike Sylwester said...

If Trump becomes the Republican Party's nominee, he will make a major issue about the Democratic Party's immigration position.

Ann Althouse said...

"In that clip of Hillary, it's clear she doesn't speak with conviction and is merely repeating the words before her."

Yeah, what I said to the person who sent me the link to that was: "Yeessh...in her defense, she was lying
She didn't believe that. It was pure hackery... It was like she was a bad actor playing the role of a social conservative."

Ann Althouse said...

I think that clip alone would cause a lot of young people to go for Bernie.

David Begley said...


SSM is not the most important issue. It is settled. Move on. We all know that high drug prices, TV commercials by drug companies, Narcan, mass incarceration and global warming are what's really important now.

Real American said...

The pro-amnesty/open borders idea is not based on fucking compassion! Their position is part of a naked power play to import more easily exploitable Democrat voters. The business community just wants easily exploitable cheap foreign labor. The La Raza crowd are just plain old racist. These people show no fucking compassion for the American citizens who are hurt by the crimes, increased burden of social services, degrading of American culture and reduced wages caused by unchecked illegal immigration and work visa abuses (by companies like Disney!). That these problems have been met with more abuse of government power and unconstitutional actions that further the breakdown of the rule of law in our country is a fucking scandal. It sure as hell isn't compassionate.

coupe said...

The thing that impresses me about Mrs. Clinton, is that she actually loves politics. She has never done well in any position she ever got elected to, and yet she thinks she is good enough to move up to the next highest level of incompetence.

She has been in the news now for longer than most people have lived. I know about 10 people from my high school graduating class, that had shorter lives than her political life, and yet seemed to accomplish so much more.

At least they had a family that loved them.

Original Mike said...

"In her defense, she was lying"

Belongs on her tombstone.

Unknown said...


How about: opportunist, scold, harpie, hypocrite, liar, snake, weasel, jerk, user, gaslighter, fraudster, sadist, hater, thief, pimp and whore.

John Christopher said...

Althouse, I don't get the LBJ analogy. At all.

coupe said...

Every time I see Mrs. Clinton, I feel sorry for her.

Because, at the end of the day, Huma goes home to Anthony.

Anglelyne said...

"...to positions that more closely reflect American ideals of welcome..."

It's hard to think of anything more fatuous than this conviction that the self-serving preferences of the NYT's bankrollers and editorialists represent "American ideals" on the subject of immigration.

Ann Althouse said...

To get the LBJ analogy, you have to see America as LBJ looking at itself and declaring itself unpretty.

The NYT thinks Sanders reflects America and America is beautiful and portrays Hillary as unbeautiful.

I say Hillary reflects America and the unbeautifulness of the reflection is just the way we are.

n.n said...

The New York Times has a difficult time reconciling their pro-choice religion. They are defensive about their cult's resumption of abortion rites, clinical cannibalism, and selective exclusion.

jr565 said...

I guess those who thought their side was less committed to the sanctity of marriage and made the point that they werent' were right. and they were lying. Right, Hillary?

Its funny to look back at old statements of pols where the express their values and say they believe things are SACRED or sanctified. Then a few years later, its like they never uttered it at all.

What do you mean Sadaam Hussein poses a threat? Where would you ever get such a notion. Gasp!

jr565 said...

Bernie Sanders also has mixed messages on illegal immigration. In 2007 he appeared on Lou Dobbs show and said this:
"I don't know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive wages down even lower than they are now."

So lets first get it out of the way. Guest workers will drive down the wages of American workers even lower than they are now. So, yeah, Bernie. Why DO we need 15 million Mexicans coming into this country as guest workers?
That almost sounds like... gasp...something that donald trump might say.
But yeah, yet another example of a pol changing his view point to get elected. Its a valid argument though, isn't it Bernie? If you now embrace millions of guest workers and you think it will drive down wages, are you not for further income inequality?

Nows the time when the Bernie sanders pretend like their candidate didn't say what he said or try to defend the doublespeak.

jr565 said...

(cont) or was Bernie opposed to guest worker programs but wants millions of additional Americans who will compete for American jobs. So, in other words, not a guest worker program but full legality.
What does he think will happen to the unemployment rate if those people who were previously guest workers or illegal workers are now competing for American jobs?
Does he think that the more workers there are competing for jobs that that determines how many jobs companies need?

Sebastian said...

"in her defense, she was lying" Best thing that can be said about her. And she's the best Dems have.

Rhythm and Balls said...

She's shown that "unfortunate tendency" on everything. That's just who she is. She has no core identity. None. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Who she is, is defined by the voters she believes could propel her to the glory of the office want her to be. She might as well say:

"Whichever voting demographic has the most power, who do you want me to be?"

It would be the most honest statement of her lack of any character. She needs a polling device that she can ask, "Pollster, pollster, on the wall - which is the most powerful political stance of all?" And then she would become that trait.

Other than that lack of any personality though, she's just a garden variety asshole.

AprilApple said...

Who cares? she's corrupt and belongs behind bars. Secret server? Anyone care? Clinton Foundation corruption... anyone care?

Gordon said...

I remember the controversy about the Hurd portrait, because it went on tour after LBJ rejected it. My parents took me to see it. It was on display in the lobby of a radio station in Clovis, NM. It's been a while, but I remember the painting being much more dramatic up close. Hurd captured a sense of the power Johnson had, and liked to wield.

If you've ever lived in southeastern New Mexico, you look at Hurd's work and think, "yeah, he gets it."