What made Derbyshire fall for Beinart’s transparently false argument?

Ron L., who follows Republican party affairs closely, replies to Peter Beinart’s specious notion that Democrats are now to the right of Republicans on immigration or are rapidly becoming so:

With the exception of Republican-turned-Democrat Jack Davis, I can’t think of a single Democrat running to the right of a Republican incumbent in immigration.

The Democrats claim to support a woefully inadequate wall, but have no desire to do anything to deal with illegal aliens already here. Even if there are a handful of good Democrats, they will give leadership of the House over to very bad Democrats.

The presumptive Democratic Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, not only has voted against every border enforcement measure, but may well be an illegal alien employer.

Beinart is a lying party hack. What is John Derbyshire’s excuse?

Tom S. writes:

Derbyshire’s reply to you and me at The Corner today is pretty pathetic, and anyone who thinks that letting the Democrats take control of Congress will advance the cause of immigration restriction is not serious, to say the least. As for his disavowal of any intention of turning Democratic, I stand by my prediction; anyone who wants to see the current crop of MoveOn.org Democrats take control of any part of our national legislature is operationally a Democrat already. Derbyshire may have a sense of humor, but I personally think that turning our country over to a bunch of crypto-communists out of spite is carrying the joke a bit far. How very disappointing…

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 30, 2006 02:04 PM | Send