ABSENCE OF LOGIC

Ned has finally recovered his usual placid demeanor after being considerably fluttered by a preposterous short note in today's "Organ of Record" the NYT. Ned will quote the entire piece so connoisseurs among his many readers can appreciate it like a glass of Stag's Leap 1986 SLV.
"The percentage of babies born in the United States in 2008 who had at least one parent who was an illegal immigrant [was one in twelve], according to a study published last week by the Pew Hispanic Center. The study also found that 80 percent of mothers who were illegal aliens had been in the country for more than a year, a statistic that seemed at odds with a recent assertion by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, that many illegal immigrants “come here to drop a child” and immediately leave. Mr. Graham has stirred controversy by proposing a reconsideration of the 14th Amendment, long interpreted as granting citizenship to anyone born in the United States."

Ned's problems with this piece arise from two issues: first, he is convinced that Graham never said that illegals come here to drop babies and "immediately leave." Ned asks the logic cognoscenti among his readers to explain to him the advantage to poor illegals who come here to have a baby, which immediately becomes a citizen with rights to Medicaid, etc, if they IMMEDIATELY LEAVE? It seems to violate the sacred principles Ned learned in Logic 101. So, Ned is convinced Graham never said any such thing.
Now on to the second delicious tidbit: let's assume that Graham was misquoted, probably on purpose, but that the statistic pointed to by the Times' anonymous writer is true, that 80% of illegal women who gave birth in 2008 had been here more than a year. Does that disprove Graham's assertion? Certainly not.
Ned asks his readers if they can adduce the erroneous assumption made by the reporter? Simply that illegals who gave birth in 2008 were giving birth to THEIR FIRST CHILD in this country. There is nothing in the piece to suggest that the child being born was the first to the illegal mother. It could well have been the second, or third, or...
Sadly, the piece illustrates one of the two logical blind spots the otherwise sane and progressive editorial department of the NYT has: illegal immigration, or legal immigration for that matter. The Times never met an immigrant they didn't like. The second? An unwavering support for Zionism regardless of the impacts on the Palestinians and even the Israeli people themselves.
Now, Ned knows he has stepped on the two Third Rails of American politics, but Mrs Ned has been hounding him to get a new hairstyle lately, anyway, so...