It’s Murphy (not Guadagno) who’s radical where immigration is concerned

It’s Murphy (not Guadagno) who’s radical where immigration is concerned

Politico explains it as, “In race to replace Christie, GOP nominee Guadagno takes hard right turn.

The Star-Ledger poses a question: “Is Guadagno trying to gain steam by ‘going Trump’?

During the Monday night LG debate, NJTV moderate Michael Aron ask the GOP candidate in a conclusory tone whether he stood by negative “stereotypes” allegedly peddled by his ticket’s campaign.

Base solely on the headlines, Save Jerseyans, you’d think Kim Guadagno made fun of someone’s handicap or an opponent’s spouse’s physical appearance…?

Nah.  They’re referring to the Republican gubernatorial nominee’s ‘Sanctuary’ television ad

Phil Murphy is openly running on turning New Jersey into a Sanctuary State. Kim Guadagno pointed out, in her ad, that illegal immigrants commit a disproportionately high number of violent crimes. Hard-hitting? You bet. But not exactly outrageous; so why are New Jersey’s media outlets parroting the Democrats’ inaccurate characterization of the Guadagno camp’s move as evidence of ideological extremism?

It wasn’t that long ago when Bill Clinton spearheaded the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Increased immigration enforcement, a larger Border Patrol, and an increased scrutiny of a myriad of immigration violations were all aimed at creating the conditions for more robust deportation procedures.

We don’t even need to go back 20+ years. In 2014, President Clinton’s wife said the following:

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Should they be able to stay here? It’s safer.

HILLARY CLINTON: Well — it may be safer but that’s not the answer. I do not —

AMANPOUR: Should they be sent back?

CLINTON: Well, first of all, we have to provide the best emergency care we can provide. We have children 5 and 6 years old who have come up from Central America. We need to do more to provide border security in southern Mexico.

AMANPOUR: So, you’re saying they should be sent back now?

CLINTON: Well, they should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who responsible adults in their families are, because there are concerns whether all of them should be sent back. But I think all of them who can be should be reunited with their families. And just as Vice President Biden is arguing today in Central America, we’ve got to do more. I started this when I was secretary to deal with the violence in this region to deal with border security.

But we have so to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay. So, we don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.

Secretary Clinton later changed her mind. Her party, as a whole, is moving further and further Left on this important public safety and national security issue. 

Guadagno? Her opposition to ILLEGAL immigration remains mainstream.

Hell, even President Barack Obama declared his intention to deport CRIMINALS while simultaneously moving to spare the so-called “Dreamers” in 2014, just three years ago, the same year that Hilldawg declared her intention to return Dreamers.

The Murphy-Oliver ticket’s open and unapologetic embrace of unqualified Sanctuary Statehood is what’s news and “extreme” and, dare I say, “hard Left.” The historical record is clear regardless of where you fall on the issue.

Do the people reporting the news NOT remember any of this? In a few cases, I think they’re so invested in their agenda that perspective is slipping from the grasp with increasing frequency each and every passing day. Others simply believe, with sincerity, that anything remotely uncomfortable (even if it’s true) is worthy of condemnation. Avoiding offense — and condemning offensive people — is becoming more imperative than the truth itself.

The reason “why” behind all of this coverage doesn’t really matter, folks. What matters is that New Jersey news consumers are getting a woefully slanted (and historically inaccurate) representation of Kim Guadagno’s totally normative view on immigration.