May 21, 2007

The most fact-free column in the history of journalism?

The Washington Post's Dana Milbank has a long history of mindlessly hating Sen. Jeff Sessions for paying close attention to the contents of immigration bills. In this year's model, Milbank can't think of anything substantive to say against Sessions, so he simply turns the Snark Level to eleven and produces a column that even Maureen Dowd would have been humiliated to have written.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer


Anonymous said...

Sorry, Steve, Milbank is absolutely correct. Milbank, not Sessions, is the true claimant for "Voice of the American People." How dare Sessions insinuate that Americans might be displeased with this finely crafted legislation. Milbank knows better. Milbank knows that ordinary Americans love this proposal and they would love it even more if they actually knew what it contained. You do realize that Milbank, unlike Sessions, was elected to his position by the general population, don't you?

Anonymous said...

It's "undocumented" on steroids, and to be expected.

The most fact-free column...

All the facts in the world will make absolutely no difference whatsoever to some people -- by now that ought to be apparent. If you cite demographic statistics -- e.g. criminality, educational attainment, etc, and regarding the future ask hard questions about all of that, which is only reasonable -- you are accused of spreading "hate".

Like I said before: it's the power of racially sensitive political correctness.

And it's a bitch.


Anonymous said...

Actually, it's powerless, or would be, if sufficient numbers would realize that the smear approach is used because there is no rational argument available, for wanting to make America more like the third world.
Only smears, but not rational arguments, are available for engorging and expanding the welfare establishment with vastly more hostiles.
This has been the rhetorical identity of the left for decades now; smears only, no arguments.

Anonymous said...

Should we ask liberal democratic senators to require all Y-Visa immigrants receive health care from the employer?

Would this be a poison pill for the corporate community, or would it just make the bill "better" from a liberal point of view?

Anonymous said...

An AoSHQ reader, steve_in_hb, has already pinned down all of the relevant facts in the immigration debate:

How can we pass this thing in a week if you guys keep insisting on analyzing it? Here are the only three things you need to know:

- A Senator had a mom who was an illegal alien

- Not supporting this bill is tantamount to advocating the execution of illegal aliens.

- The benevolent dictator McCain has already decided what we should think. Disagreeing means we are stupid or are unaware of what's actually in the bill.

Anonymous said...

"So much of the media's attitude toward the immigration issue is motivated by blatant status assertion. Milbank wants us to know that he's too cool to have thought about illegal immigration. Sure, he constantly reveals himself as a total ignoramus on the subject, but that's the point: he can afford to be. Nobody from Oaxaca is going to compete for his job."

I think that "too cool" thing is right on the money. When you argue with white liberals who support mass immigration, there's definitely a sense that they regard any sort of passion about the issue as tacky.

As for Milbank, he's a huge embarrassment to the Post. It bewilders me why they continue to publish his idiotic "analysis" pieces. He must have some truly awful pictures of Katherine Graham in his safety deposit box.

Anonymous said...

"The need to change the nation's immigration laws cannot be doubted"

That's a statement of religious belief if ever there was one...

Anonymous said...

Ive cut and pasted Millbank's NNDB page...........He is a Skull and Bones guy. No wonder he likes Bush...Here it is:

AKA Dana T Milbank

Born: 27-Apr-1968

Gender: Male
Race or Ethnicity: White
Sexual orientation: Straight
Occupation: Journalist

Nationality: United States
Executive summary: Washington Post White House reporter

The most hated man in the White House press corps.

In July 2001, Milbank filed a pool report which managed to incense the White House. The summary of the President's morning, never meant to be read by the general public, was then leaked to National Review who promptly published the thing in an effort to shame the reporter. Instead, Milbank responded by producing a series of even more grandiloquent memos.

A member of Yale's secret society Skull and Bones, in March 2004 Milbank allegedly confided to Washington gossip columnist Lloyd Grove: "I have been assigned to monitor all secret hand signals during the debates. [...] I have it on good information that if this one gets tied up in a recount, Potter Stewart will return from the grave to write the majority opinion."

Wife: (unknown)

University: BA, Yale University (1990)

The Washington Post
The New Republic 1998-
The Wall Street Journal 1990-98
Hoover Institution Media Fellow (2005)
Skull and Bones Society