Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
The conclave to elect Pope Benedict XVI’s successor begins today (March 12). As a traditional Catholic and an American patriot, I am mildly hopeful about the liturgical and theological outcome—but, frankly, not optimistic about the implications for the immigration debate.
Just over ten years ago, (January 22, 2003), the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops [USCCB] and the bishops of Mexico sent a Pastoral Letter to Catholic parishes throughout the US and Mexico entitled, Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope. Complete with footnotes and definitions, it amounted to a Treason Lobby vade mecum, a blueprint that, for all its Biblical injunctions, primarily sought the amnesty of untold millions of illegal aliens currently in the US—the majority of whom are Mexican nationals (and nominal Catholics).
As VDARE.com readers are well aware, Amnesty attempts were twice defeated in Congress during the second term of President George W. Bush. But now the Obama Administration has made “comprehensive immigration reform”—the cowardly code word for amnesty—a top priority in its second term. The GOP Establishment is in obvious disarray and appears willing to cave on core issues, including amnesty.
And, as if prompted by the Obama Administration, on the Feast of the Epiphany (January 6), the USCCB's Migration and Refugee Services Committee, which is headed by Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles—himself a Mexican immigrant—launched a postcard campaign calling on Congress to pass bills that
provide a path to citizenship for undocumented persons in the country; preserve family units as a cornerstone of our national immigration system; provide a legal path for low-skilled immigrant workers to come and work in the U.S.; restore due process protections to (illegal) immigrants, and address the root causes of migration, caused by persecution and economic disparity.
As a Catholic, I can only say sadly that it is all too understandable why critics see the USCCB merely as a wing of the Democratic Party. (Of course, the leaders of many Protestant denominations have taken positions on immigration similar to the Catholic Bishops—and their parishioners have responded in similar ways to their Catholic brethren, by rejecting them.)
Within USCCB, the current President, Timothy Cardinal Dolan of the New York Archdiocese, has become the “go-to guy” in articulating the Church's position on immigration.
In February, 2012, upon returning from Rome where he had received his red hat as a cardinal, Dolan was quoted by the NY Times in which he said:
[H]e first wanted the church to be more effective locally and nationally in its outreach to immigrants, particularly Latinos, who are no longer in Catholic schools in the numbers they once were.
“The church has been the engine of welcoming people, caring for them and getting them settled as happy, productive citizens who are loyal citizens and loyal Catholics,” he said. “It bothers me that for the first time in American Catholic history, we may not be responding well to the needs of immigrant children in our Catholic schools.”
Cardinal Dolan Sets Agenda for Return to New York, By Sharon Otterman, February 20, 2012
On his own Diocesan blog, Dolan wrote
"Comprehensive immigration reform" is a logical, long-overdue expression of the true "sentiment in our national soul...of welcome and embrace to the immigrant."[Immigration Reform, April 27th, 2010]
(Appallingly, Dolan is now being mentioned as the next Pope—for example
Last Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul rose on the Senate floor to declare a filibuster and pledge he would not sit down until either he could speak no longer or got an answer to his question about Barack Obama's war powers.
Does the president, Paul demanded to know, in the absence of an imminent threat, have the right to order U.S. citizens killed by drone strike on U.S. soil?
Serbian tourist Aleksandra Cvetkovic at the moment of her March 1 assault by Hispanic “social conservative” Deanne Ostbye
Following the GOP’s second consecutive Presidential catastrophe, all of its Finest Minds dusted off their old amnestisiac talking points: obviously, the Party’s salvation lies in another mass amnesty of maybe 24 million illegal alien invaders [PDF] (of course, they radically lowball the count), plus several million illegal anchor babies, plus (though they somehow forgot to mention this) as many as 120 million “relatives,” real and fraudulent, through family reunification and chain migration.
We weren't effective in my message primarily to minority voters, to Hispanic-Americans, African-Americans, other minorities. That was a real mistake.
Romney relays disappointment over loss, admits mistakes, in first sitdown since 2012 election, FoxNews.com, March 3, 2013.
These GOP values apparently include:
1. Low average IQs;
2. Astronomical crime rates;
3. A proclivity for organized crime and collective violence;
4. The violent seizure of all public space (schools, buses, subways, parks, malls, streets, and even stoops);
5. Assaulting and murdering policemen;
6. Majority rates of illegitimacy;
7. Massive exploitation of welfare programs;
9. Militant anti-intellectualism;
10. Implacable irredentism; and
Let’s look at a couple of potential voters Romney let get away: Deanne Ostbye and Eriese Tisdale.
Ostbye, 30, leapt from nowhere to notoriety on March 1, when she was caught on camera in New York’s Times Square bodyslamming Serbian tourist Aleksandra Cvetkovic, 34, giving Cvetkovic bloody head wounds:
It was 1 p.m., and the place was swarming with tourists and probably more cops per square mile than anywhere in America, excepting the perimeter of a presidential motorcade.
And yet the area still wasn’t safe for a pretty blonde to stop and have her picture taken.
That’s the America that both major parties have striven to bring about.
The Main Stream Media described Ostbye as a “tourist,” just like her victim, and the “anti-racist” brigade clogged newspaper comment threads, claiming that Ostbye was “white.” (Typical comment on a Daily Mail comment thread: “They are both white you ignorant muppet”.) White-enough, I guess, like “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman.
Actually, Ostbye is a Hispanic drifter who had been arrested no fewer than five times in three different states—Maine, Washington, and New York—since January, 2012: three times for assault, as well as for prostitution and drugs. Quite probably there are earlier misdemeanor arrests which have been expunged. (Ostbye is still in custody, amazingly, and on March 8 was ordered to undergo a psychiatric examination.)
Of course, apologists will argue that Ostbye is an anomaly among Hispanics. My view: The only thing anomalous about her is that she appears to be a lone wolf. Hispanics
National Data| February Jobs: Immigrant Employment Rose FOUR TIMES FASTER Than Native-born Employment Over Past Year
The U.S. economy gained 236,000 jobs in February, above what had been expected, while the unemployment rate fell to 7.7 percent, its lowest level since December 2008. But MSM reaction was somewhat muted, apparently because of fears of the sequester’s impact and because the labor force participation rate fell. (For example, see here and here).
Further context: 10.4 million native-born Americans were unemployed in February 2013 according to data in the just released BLS report. At 150,000 per month it would take about six-years to put them back to work.
Add to this the 77.5 million native-born Americans of working age who are not in the labor force—many dropping out rather than look for jobs they feel do not exist, and future labor force growth, and….we are on a treadmill to nowhere.
For context, about 90,000 legal immigrants arrive legally in the U.S. every month. That means more than one-third of all jobs created last month are needed just to absorb new legal entrants.
After January’s record displacement, February was one of the rare months in which the bulk of the new jobs went to native-born Americans. In February:
- Total employment rose by 170,000, or by 0.12%
- Native-born employment rose by 169,000, or by 0.14%
- Foreign-born employment rose by 1,000, or by 0.01%
(My research shows that, for whatever reason, February is traditionally a month when immigrants lose ground relative to natives. In fact, immigrant job
We’re living in a country that is 70-percent socialist, the government takes 60 percent of your money. They are taking care of your health care, of your pensions. They’re telling you who you can hire, what the regulations will be. And you want to suck up to your little liberal friends and say, ‘Oh, but we want to legalize pot.’ You know, if you’re a little more manly you would tell them what your position on employment discrimination is. How about that? But it’s always ‘We want to legalize pot.’
Coulter’s jibe hits especially hard because she is clearly referring to one person in particular—Rand Paul, the junior Senator from Kentucky.
During his campaign for the Senate, Rand Paul plainly stated the axiomatic libertarian position on employment discrimination–namely, that businesses should have the right to exercise freedom of association in defiance of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But within hours, Paul reversed himself and performed a ritualized grovel. And during his maiden speech on the Senate floor, Paul took care to bash Kentucky statesman Henry Clay for not backing abolitionism.
Since entering the Senate, Paul has made sure to appeal to powerful constituencies within the conservative movement. He's taken a strong stand in defense of traditional marriage. He was even rebuked by the head of the Family Research Council for joking that he didn't think President Obama's position on marriage “could get any gayer.”
Unlike his father, he has made his peace with the neoconservatives, declaring “An attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States.”
Paul also aggressively pressed Hillary Clinton during the Senate hearings on Benghazi. The scion of an “isolationist” Congressman emerged as an almost Jacksonian nationalist.
Many libertarians were becoming uneasy with Senator Paul’s regression into seemingly standard Republicanism.
However, Rand Paul's 13-hour filibuster on Wednesday has brought home his libertarian base and established him as a national leader. Paul held the Senate floor, and America’s attention, by demanding the Obama Administration answer whether the President has the right to use drones to kill Americans on American soil. He was initially joined by Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, but over the course of the day also won support from Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, and Reince Priebus.
Even libertarian critics disgusted with Rand's respectability have expressed their support. Paul finds himself the head of a bipartisan coalition in defense of civil liberties. [#StandwithRand | The libertarian moment has arrived – thanks to Rand Paul, by Justin Raimondo, AntiWar.com, March 8, 2013]
The Amnesty duo, of course, were literally dining with President Obama during Rand's filibuster.
Conservatives hungry for confrontation reacted with fury against McCain and his Mini-Me. Rush Limbaugh slammed them as the “old guard playing footsie with Obama” while Paul was making a stand.
Rand Paul's political masterstroke nailed down conservatives, brought home libertarians, and embarrassed (and intrigued) liberals.
In response, Paul is being refreshingly frank (for a politician) about his plans to exploit his position to run for President in 2016.
Only one obstacle remains on the horizon—the battle over amnesty. How Rand Paul handles this determines whether he will be the Republican favorite for the nomination…or just another false start. There is both cause for hope—and cause for despair.
Rand Paul took strong implicit stances on the immigration issue during his campaign. According to spokesperson Jesse Benton in 2010:
Rand Paul will secure our border by any means needed as our current open border is a threat to national security and economic well-being.
Paul made the common sense observation that Mexican immigrants
Memo From Middle America | Treason Lobby’s NALACC Wants “Human Stories”?—We Can Give Them “Human Stories”!
The acronym stands for “National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities”—headquartered in Chicago. The group’s title, of course, refers to Latin American and Caribbean “communities” in the United States but which, significantly, still identify as Latin American and Caribbean.
You can visit the NALACC’s website here. Just browse a bit, and you can get the gist of where it’s headed. Example: Press Release: Latino Immigrants Call for Immediate Halt of Deportations, Reunification of Families, and Fast-Track to Citizenship.
NALACC’s “partners”—i.e. financial backers—include a Mexican NGO, the Iniciativa Ciudadana (Citizen’s Initiative in English, but of course it means Mexican citizens) which is consortium of many Mexican migratory rights agencies—and NALACC, which is supposed to be an American agency.
Another funder is the Robin Hood Tax Campaign, which is sort of a Who’s Who of globalism—of course it includes George Soros, but also Bill Gates, Mark Cuban, Warren Buffett, Paul Krugman, Al Gore, the Vatican, the NY Times Editorial Board, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Jesse Jackson and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
Is it any wonder that we think of people like NALACC’s Board of Directors as part of the Treason Lobby?
To further promote the growing Hispanicization of the United States, of which the mooted Obama/ Rubio Amnesty/ Immigration Surge is a part, NALACC runs a media campaign, the “Somos / We Are initiative”. (Somos is Spanish for “We Are”).
The initiative “Somos /We Are” is an effort to reclaim the humanity and integrity of immigrant communities, particularly those of Latin American origin. The campaign has two stated goals:
1. To challenge the mistaken negative perception about Latino immigrants that is perpetuated in the mainstream media [AW: Seriously?], by promoting meaningful interactions between native born and foreign born nationals. These interactions can establish the basis for a personal connection that can foster a sense of common humanity.
2. To empower Latino immigrant communities by emphasizing their strengths and contributions.
hateful terms such as ‘illegal immigrants´
As you read through a book, as the pages clock by, hints of the author’s underlying attitudes accumulate until, by halfway through the thing, you have a clear picture of those attitudes. In the case of a certain type of author—a person with not much power of imagination or self-examination—you may have a clearer picture of his attitudes than he has himself.
Yes, there are two authors there, and you can speculate for yourself about who did how much of the writing. But, given that Jeb Bush is an ambitious politician, and that now is about the right time for ambitious politicians to lay down markers for the 2016 election, I doubt there is a single sentence here that Jeb Bush didn’t sign off on—whether he actually wrote the book or not. So I am blaming him for it.
So what insights into this possible 2016 presidential candidate do we get from Immigration Wars?
The main one I got: Jeb Bush just doesn’t like Americans very much.
Bush packs both of those into a single sentence:
It is essential that we have an ample supply of workers both for labor-intensive jobs that few Americans want and for highly skilled jobs for which there are inadequate numbers of Americans with the skills to fit them. 
Business-wise we’re not up to much, either: “Like most immigrants, Hispanics are tremendously entrepreneurial.”  As opposed to those dull, risk-averse non-Hispanic and non-immigrant Americans!
As VDARE.com readers know, this last assertion is demonstrably untrue. Indeed, Bush’s book abounds in long-debunked falsehoods—so much so that, by fifty or so pages in, the well-informed commentator can’t resist doing a search on “44 percent.” Yep, there it is!—“Whereas Republicans had won 44 percent of the Hispanic vote …” 
El Paso, Texas, is one of the nation’s three largest safe cities. 
The deficiencies of us actual citizens of the U.S.A. are even spiritual.
Immigrants are unlikely to be complacent about the freedom and opportunity that for them previously was only a dream and was gained only through great effort and sacrifice. Our nation constantly needs the replenishment of our spirit that immigrants bring. 
The accumulating impression left by Jeb Bush: Americans are not much good for anything. Only immigrants, with “their energy, vitality, talent, and enterprise”  can overcome the lassitude, torpor, mediocrity, and complacency of the native-born.
We get a revealing metaphor here, one that
H/T One Old Vet
One Old Vet sprang back into action early today, publishing a compendium of 35 Amnesty related stories. Separately, there was a compendium of 7 stories on DHS Operation “Jail Break”.
Several particularly strong stories were carried individually including a video “Arizona Ranchers on High Alert because of Increase in Illegal Border Incursions” and an extremely annoying report More ILLEGALS Caught, Expecting Quick Release, Border Patrol Union Says
THE MONITOR | McALLEN — Illegal immigrants have started surrendering to local Border Patrol agents after crossing the Rio Grande, convinced they’ll be released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement…
“These are people that are just voluntarily turning themselves in to our agents with the expectation they’ll be released,” said Border Patrol Agent Paul Perez, president of the Rio Grande Valley union of the National Border Patrol Council. “When you cross with the expectation that you’ll be released, there’s no need to hide, there’s no need to run."
This has happened before.
Of the 35 stories, 15 were about the Jeb Bush row. Of these the most interesting was by Mark Krikorian at National Review Online: Jeb Bush’s False-Flag Operation March 5, 2013
Jeb Bush generated quite a bit of publicity for his new book yesterday by suggesting that amnestied illegal immigrants should not be eligible for citizenship…
Unfortunately, it’s a trick.
American college campuses are the most fertile grounds for fake hate. They're marinated in identity politics and packed with self-indulgent, tenured radicals suspended in the 1960s. In the name of enlightenment and tolerance, these institutions of higher learning breed a corrosive culture of left-wing self-victimization. Take my alma mater, Oberlin College. Please.
“Comprehensive Immigration Reform” a.k.a. Amnesty plus Immigration Surge is nothing less than full-out bipartisan assault on the historic American nation —pressed by an Obama Administration determined to Elect a New People; and a Hispanicked Republican Establishment suffering from ADD (Adelson Dollar Disorder), Bush dynastic delusions and/or madness. As “anti-racist” activist Tim Wise notoriously prophesied in the midst of the momentary Conservatism Inc. jubilation after the (Tea Party-fueled) November 2010 mid-term election:
You need to drink up.
Because your time is limited.
Real damned limited.
The clock that reminds you how little time you and yours have left.
Not much more now.
I know, you think you’ve taken “your country back” with this election—and of course you have always thought it was yours for the taking, cuz that’s what we white folks are bred to believe, that it’s ours, and how dare anyone else say otherwise—but you are wrong.
[An Open Letter to the White Right, On the Occasion of Your Recent, Successful Temper Tantrum, Timwise.org, November3, 2010]
The greatest slogan that I hated during this last campaign was 'We want to take back our country.' Guys, it's not your country anymore— it's our country.
[Sam Donaldson Tells Tea Partiers 'It's Not Your Country Anymore - It's Our Country', Newsbusters.org, December 24, 2012]
For a moment, let’s suppose Wise and Donaldson are correct/ Comprehensive Immigration” Reform passes: it’s their country.
Let’s consider two examples of what their country might look like—one where superior Left-leaning white people and their minority allies have displaced those nasty, brutish white conservatives.
- South Africa
Of course, Leftists like Wise and Donaldson care only about white civilizations’ defeat and usurpation. But the rest of the story can sometime be spotted in the Main Stream Media—witness this sidebar to a report of the sensational killing of model Reeva Steenkamp by track icon Oscar Pistorius, the so-called Blade Runner:
South Africa has some of the world's highest rates of violent crime and many homeowners carry weapons to defend themselves against intruders.
An average of nearly 50 people are murdered there each day,
Twenty years ago, when I was a college student getting interested in conservative politics, the Right was going through a “crack-up” [™R. Emmett Tyrrell] after the demise of Communism and the then-recent defeat of George H.W. Bush. This was disrupting the conservative coalition that had existed for roughly two decades.
Books such as David Frum’s Dead Right and Paul Gottfried’s The Conservative Movement examined the various factions of the right and laid out what they stood for. Personally, I wasn’t drawn to conservatism because of the flat tax or missile defense systems. Instead, I was living in an extremely anti-white PC environment at my liberal college and was looking to join a resistance movement.
Needless to say, I identified with the paleoconservative wing of conservatism as exemplified by Sam Francis, Pat Buchanan, Jared Taylor, Paul Gottfried and the writers gathered around Chronicles magazine. These hard men spoke truth to power on issues of race and had no desire to make peace with those who supported Affirmative Action, multiculturalism and other anti-white trends.
Of course, the paleos lost—but not before giving the GOP and the Conservative Establishment a scare with the presidential campaigns of Buchanan and the intellectual firepower of the Chronicles crowd and sympathetic journalists such as Joe Sobran and Peter Brimelow (then still with National Review).
Republicans and Establishment Conservatives have long since given up any pretense of opposition to Affirmative Action and multiculturalism—let alone immigration. Indeed, they are often now on the wrong side of these issues. Thus all their current presidential contenders for 2016—Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Paul Ryan and Jeb Bush—support Amnesty.
Needless to say, folding like origami on these issues has not helped the GOP win elections. Nor has it prevented a further rift within the dwindling number of those who still call themselves conservative.
The 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) will be held March 14-16 in the Washington D.C. area. Those who cannot attend will miss out on seeing a Who’s Who of Amnesty supporters like Rubio, Paul and Bush along with conservative heavyweights such as Francesca Chambers, Chelsi Henry and T.W. Shannon.
Who? I’ve never heard of the last three either. But they are black—so, of course, they are featured speakers at CPAC. Presumably, they are there to hector white College Republican types during the panels on how to attract minority voters and “A Roundtable Discussion on The Future of the Movement: Winning with Generation X/Y.”
But the main buzz around this year’s CPAC is the exclusion of GOProud, a gay Republican group that had exhibited at past CPACs (and, according to one person I know who attended, was harassing gay marriage opponents).
This caused MSNBC’s token Republican, S.E. Cupp [Twitter] to publicly boycott the event. Another house conservative, Jennifer Rubin [email her]of the Washington Post, cheered her on, citing Cupp’s “political courage.” CPAC damages itself and the GOP, February 27, 2013
Yet real courage would be challenging the opinions and views of their leftist employers. Attacking supposedly fellow conservatives will only enhance the job security of these two specimens of what Sam Francis called “the harmless persuasion.”
Not to be outdone, National Review Online posted several columns attacking CPAC’s decision to exclude GOProud, and also a perhaps-related move to not invite New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. In a conclusive demonstration that NR is no longer in any sense a Catholic magazine, an editorial titled “CPAC’s Empty Chairs” proclaimed:
Conservative opinion on the intersection of homosexuality and politics is not monolithic, especially among the college-aged set that makes up the better part of CPAC attendees. And a gathering that hopes to speak for the conservative movement will be better equipped to do so if it represents the overlapping gamut of views included in it.
Jonah Goldberg chimed in, criticizing CPAC for acting as a “border guard”
The Fulford File | Communism, Socialism, Cultural Marxism, Democratic Hegemonists, Crony Capitalism, Ethnic Agendas, Treason Etc.—The “Ugly Roots” Of Immigration Enthusiasm
A number of “Hispanic Republicans” a.k.a. professional ethnics/ Treason Lobby shills recently launched what is obviously an orchestrated guilt-by-association smear of CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA and immigration patriots in general on the grounds that that they are all secretly eugenicists, pro-abortion, “nativists” etc. etc.
- Mario H. Lopez, (email him) president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, invoked the ghosts of Thomas Malthus, Paul Ehrlich, Sir Francis Galton, and Margaret Sanger to smear FAIR’s Dan Stein, VDARE.com columnist Donald A. Collins, and Dr. John Tanton—a real-life immigration patriot hero whom VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow described in Alien Nation ., echoing Robert E. Lee, as “a citizen who has taken up arms for his country.” [Hijacking Immigration?, Human Life Review, Fall 2012]
- Linda Chavez [Email her] echo-chambered Lopez in in her Creators Syndicate column, saying that immigration patriots, because of these fantasized associations with “pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia and assisted suicide” ideas, constitute Strange Bedfellows For Conservatives. In the New York Post this became the Anti-immigration lobby’s ugly roots. [February 8, 2013].
Ms. Chavez, a former member of the Young People's Socialist League, is at best a neoconservative but she gets to lay down the law.
- Bob Quasius [Twitter] the white guy at “Café Con Leche Republicans” is attacking Ann Coulter with many references to dead nativists, and makes a drive-by attack on Charles Murray, who is allegedly “hardly a credible source on demographics” because of the familiar accusations of racism which are (a) unfounded, and (b) irrelevant to credibility since Murray doesn’t just assert demographic facts, but always provides data.
Of course, this is an old, tired argument for Conservatism Inc. immigration enthusiasts—for our Washington Watcher’s documentation and debunking, see here. Even National Review’s immigration beards have been induced to whimper—see Krikorian and O’Sullivan here and here.
All the current smearers are Hispanic, even Quasius. (Well, actually he’s married to a Hispanic woman, and makes a living, GOP-campaign consultant style, by running Café Con Leche Republicans and whining about “Hate.”)
They apparently are Republicans. And they say they’re conservatives. But they’re favoring radically transformative levels of legal and illegal immigration, a program supported by the worst elements of the hard Left—including the current President of the United States.
So, if we’re looking at motives, here are the “ugly roots” of immigration enthusiasm:
The 1965 Immigration Act replaced the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, which was an anti-Communist bill. The breakdown of the McCarran-Walter Act was a major objective of the Communists, as Congress heard in testimony in 1965, and pro-Communist writers are still gloating over its defeat. See, more recently, Communist Party Resolves: Immigrant rights is a struggle for democracy, CPUSA website, May 27, 2010.
Mexico is a much more socialist country than the United States, and more immigration will tend to make the US more socialist. American socialists know this [ Socialism and Immigrants’ Rights, By Teddy Shibabaw, SocialistAlternative, June 22, 2010] and perhaps, once again, we should include the current President of the United States in their number. Elected with the votes of many Hispanic legal
S Adelson: "My orders are, swing Left!"
Could it be that all this hoop-la about the GOP being more open to Amnesty aka “immigration reform” and Minority Outreach generally reflects not a (highly questionable) reaction to the 2012 election but simply the fact that unprecedented amounts of cash are being been made available to those willing to sing the Treason Lobby song?
Consider the tasteless advertorial carried by Politico on Thursday Republican group readies immigration blitz By Alexander Burns and Maggie Haberman 2/28 13
The American Action Network is poised to launch a major advocacy campaign aimed at winning support for immigration reform on the right...
AAN officials described the campaign in detail to POLITICO, outlining how the organization aims to drum up support for both immigration legislation and Republican budget proposals in the coming months.
This account got right to their main argument
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in several speeches she gave in 1994, 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2004, according to CNN.[ Sotomayor's 'wise Latina' comment a staple of her speeches, June 8, 2009]
Since Monday, the MSM has been celebrating Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor—searching Google News on her name brings up one valentine after another:
- "Discrimination is discrimination, and what Congress said is it continues,"5 hours ago CBS News
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor Explains Class in the US Better Than Anyone, Huffington Post, February 26, 2013
- Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor: A Proud 'Product of ... Civilrights.org-9 hours ago
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor slams Texas prosecutor for racial remark5. Los Angeles Times, February 25, 2013
- Sotomayor chides prosecutor for 'racially charged' question7. In-Depth, Washington Post, February 25, 2013
- Sotomayor slams prosecutor's racial remarks, Blog -Politico (blog), February 25, 2013
- Sonia Sotomayor Condemns Prosecutor's Racially Charged Question, Huffington Post, February 25, 2013
- Sonia Sotomayor slams prosecutor's moronic strategy, racist remarks, msnNOW, February 25, 2013
What’s this all about?
In a Texas federal drug trial in 2011, Assistant U.S. Attorney Sam Ponder had asked black defendant Bongani Charles Calhoun on the stand of a situation in which he had found himself,
“You've got African-Americans, you've got Hispanics, you've got a bag full of money. Does that tell you - a light bulb doesn't go off in your head and say, this is a drug deal?”
The blacks in the hotel room had been Calhoun’s accomplices. They thought the Hispanics were going to sell them drugs. But the Hispanics were DEA agents. The bag of money came from Calhoun and his black accomplices.
Calhoun claimed to have no knowledge of any drug deal. Of course, he was lying and was duly convicted.
No one saw anything wrong with Ponder’s conduct at the time. And nothing was wrong.
You could say the DEA engaged in “racial profiling”—by having exclusively Hispanic agents play drug dealers. But no one has attacked the agency (yet). Had a racially mixed group of white and Hispanic agents posed as dealers, the buy-and-bust operation would have been a failure because… life is not like that. It would have been a giveaway that the deal was a law enforcement sting.
Indeed, Bongani Charles Calhoun and his crime partners were themselves guilty of racial profiling—that’s why they accepted the Hispanic agents
A VDARE.com reader sent a comment from The Hill
“random minorities with a supposed bag full of money and the guy can't make a reasonable inference? they most likely were not going to buy real estate or deposit it with their stockbroker.” Sotomayor reprimands federal prosecutor for racial remark, By Sam Baker, February 25, 2013.
Eventually, Calhoun and/ or his lawyers sought to convert Ponder’s reality-based question into a racist affront. But by then it was too late to appeal on that basis, and the Supreme Court rejected the argument.
Although Sotomayor acknowledged, the appeal was dead, she attached a statement to the decision, saying the question “tapped a deep and sorry vein of racial prejudice that has run through the history of criminal justice in our nation,” and was “pernicious in its attempt to substitute racial stereotype for evidence.” [BONGANI CHARLES CALHOUN v. UNITED STATES (PDF) , U.S. Supreme Court, February 25, 2013.]
Ponder had done no such thing. He had asked a perfectly reasonable question of the defendant, regarding the latter’s state of mind, which would have been formed by valid empirical generalizations which are called, among other things, “stereotypes.”
Some of the earliest valentines were reportorials that seemed to follow the lead of Reuters’ Lawrence Hurley.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Monday condemned racially charged
Texas is a right-minded red state, where patriotism is still a virtue and political correctness is out of vogue. So how on earth have left-wing educators in public classrooms been allowed to instruct Lone Star students to dress in Islamic garb, call the 9/11 jihadists "freedom fighters" and treat the Boston Tea Party participants as "terrorists"?