Res Ipsa Loquitur

Posted 7:59:00 PM by DO (link)

THAT FOOLISH WSJ EDITORIAL

As already noted, the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal has come out in support for Utah Representative Chris Cannon's embattled primary candidacy (June 22nd). No surprise there: the Wall Street Journal, after all, is the same paper that thinks the 4th of July a fitting moment to call for a constitutional ammendment stating "there shall be open borders".

The editorial seems to be generating something of a debate. Professor Bainbridge gets it badly wrong, praising the tactics employed by the editorial -- the usual "where do they get their funding?" smear -- and warmly endorsing the Bush amnesty proposal. As several WSJ readers have pointed out in the letters section of the paper, however, not only do we not need more immigrants (legal or otherwise), we also can't afford them.

But most of those who've posted on the issue seem to have more sense than Bainbridge. Lonewacko, for example, or Michael Williams or Michelle Malkin.

The sooner conservatives learn to distrust the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal, the better.

[update: A recent John Derbyshire column at National Review goes to the heart of the matter. Derbyshire writes:

"I much prefer a free market to an unfree one, but I don't believe that the free market is an infallible judge of what is good for the country in all aspects. Should the free market determine defense policy? (Pearl Harbor's been attacked! Oh, never mind, the free market will take care of it.) Public health policy? (A horrible new plague is killing tens of thousands of Americans every week! Oh, don't worry, leave it to the free market.) Then why should the free market decide population policy?" ]