Times Plays Elitist Tunes and Seduces the Pols

March 21, 2006 |
If ordinary folks aren't paying attention, The Times-led elite will decide things, according to its own strange worldview.

The bipartisan elite that runs this country is not to be trusted with safeguarding America's national destiny. Most of these elitists worship the strange gods of multiculturalism, globalism and relativism, and so they are blind to the practical realities of preserving a single country -- this country.

The most influential newspaper in the United States, The New York Times, demonstrates a determined carelessness about domestic tranquillity and homeland security. And here's the scary part: Top politicians, including the Republican president, George W. Bush, are often eager to sign on to the same schemes, too.

It's The Times that provides the intellectual forum for both Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, to find "common ground," and it's there that they bury the national interest. Two editorials, one atop the other, in Saturday's Times provide a snapshot of this elite process in operation.

The first praised the effort by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, to create a "guest-worker" program as the key to a new immigration bill. Most Americans understand by now that "guest worker" is code for amnesty and permanently porous borders. Which, of course, is exactly what the donkey and elephant elite want to see happen.

Democrats such as Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) seek more immigrants as part of their multicultural "nation of nations" agenda. And Republicans such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a close ally of Specter and Kennedy, are infatuated with cheap labor as part of their globalization vision. And, oh yes, getting an editorial pat on the head from The Times is gratifying, too.

Bush, of course, rarely gets a kind word from The Times, but the Texan is reliably lauded for supporting the guest-worker provision. Indeed, W. is such a guest-worker enthusiast that some forthright conservatives have sought to restrain him; Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, warns that Bush risks "self-immolation" on the issue.

Fortunately, other politicians haven't drunk the multi-globalist Kool-Aid. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) opposes the guest-worker plan and proposes, instead, tougher border enforcement. If Frist keeps it up, he'll suffer the full fury of The Times editorial page -- but he'll have the makings of a powerful presidential campaign.

And that's the point: Yes, The Times is mighty, but press power is trumped by people power on Election Day. And yet if ordinary folks aren't paying attention, The Times-led elite will decide things, according to its own strange worldview.

So to the second Times editorial on Saturday, concerning the case of Imam Umar Abdul-Jalil, the chief chaplain of the New York City Department of Correction. Last year, Abdul-Jalil told a Muslim group, "The greatest terrorists in the world occupy the White House." It's worth remembering that the speaker is an influential government employee: The city's jails take in 100,000 people a year.

Some might say Abdul-Jalil's words were a dangerous incitement, even treason. In 1918, the government jailed socialist politician Eugene V. Debs for the crime of denouncing American participation in World War I. Civil libertarians were horrified. On the other hand, the United States won that war.

Today we are fighting another war, and having a hard time at it, and yet Abdul-Jalil roots for the enemy. So what's New York City doing? Not much. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a Republican, has decided that Abdul-Jalil should suffer a two-week suspension -- and then return to his "chaplain" duties.

A few voices rose up in outrage against this wrist-slap, but The Times, true to its relativistic vision -- America is nothing special -- praised Bloomberg's decision as a "fair outcome."

That's The Times' view of our country: We, the people, aren't really worth defending. What's worth defending are abstractions, such as the free flow of immigrants and freedom of speech -- no matter the consequences.

And as we have seen, when voters aren't paying attention, politicians of both parties let themselves be seduced by the siren song from West 43rd Street.

Join the Conversation

Please log in below through Disqus, Twitter or Facebook to participate in the conversation. Your email address, which is required for a Disqus account, will not be publicly displayed. If you sign in with Twitter or Facebook, you have the option of publishing your comments in those streams as well.