Wherefore Wayfair

I take it that the government is underwriting the order of $200,000 worth of bedding and other furniture to BCFS, a nonprofit contractor that operates immigration detention facilities at the southern U.S. border. The furniture is needed to accommodate the detention of illegal aliens crossing into the United States. Current accommodations are inadequate to the task occasioned by the massive invasion with which our law enforcement authorities are attempting to cope.

You’d think that the news might prompt a protest from citizens and taxpayers sick of the enormous resources devoted to the invasion crisis. But no: Wayfair employees supporting the illegals staged a walkout in protest of the company’s efforts to improve the situation for those detained. I don’t claim to understand the rationale. It must be counterintuitive. I guess they would prefer that the government roll out the welcome sign and give up our borders.

Fox Business reports that Wayfair executives “praised the more than 500 employees who called for the company to sever business ties with immigration contractors, but denied their request.” I can understand the Wayfair executives if their praise is geared to averting a public relations crisis. Firing otherwise seems like a more rational response.

The New York Times tops them all. As I read the Times’s purported news story on the situation, the Times is promoting a boycott of Wayfair.

These people are all nuts, but who is the craziest? As Bobby O’Rourke might put it (I hope I have this right): ¿Quien es el mas loco? I’m going with the Times.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line