Recent News

There was a MainStream Media conference call today (June 14) by Treason Lobbyists wanting to blame all resistance to amnesty on Dr. John Tanton (again) and “nativists” in general.

Breitbart summarized it well:

An employee of Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), together with a political ally of “Gang of Eight” member Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), will argue Friday that groups opposed to the immigration bill pending in the U.S. Senate are "nativists," Breitbart News has learned.

ATR’s Josh Culling and Hispanic Leadership Fund (HLF) president Mario Lopez will make the argument on a conference call with mainstream media reporters on Friday at 11 AM EDT. Brad Bailey of an organization called Texas Immigration Studies will join them on the call.

(877) 888-4319: Norquist, Rubio Allies To Paint Immigration Bill Opponents As Nativists On Conference Call, by Matthew Boyle, June 13, 2013

Needless to say, genuine conservatives will not be fooled by this—Breitbart rightly notes that these people are “described” as “conservative leaders" by their PR types.

But the Main Stream Media can be expected to play along. When HLF president Mario H. Lopez (email him) surfaced some months ago with an article on this stuff in Human Life Review, VDARE.com’s Washington Watcher said all too accurately that “the MSM, which usually presents the Religious Right and Grover Norquist as the root of all evil in America, has done its job in hyping this supposed controversy.”

The Treason Lobby regularly smears opponents of amnesty by tying them to “White nationalism”. This can’t literally be true, since “White nationalism” is something of a fringe movement, whereas opposition to amnesty polls in the 70s and 80s with actual Americans. (Up to 88 percent with African-Americans, but I suppose “black nationalism” isn’t objectionable as far as the MSM is concerned.)

Moreover, as I explained in an article entitled Communism, Socialism, Cultural Marxism, Democratic Hegemonists, Crony Capitalism, Ethnic Agendas, Treason Etc.—The “Ugly Roots” Of Immigration Enthusiasm, immigration enthusiasts claiming that Dr. Tanton and people like, well, me, are at the “root” of opposition to immigration have unspoken or even open nefarious agendas of their own.

Thus it’s obvious that something called the Hispanic Leadership Fund is for Hispanic immigration even it costs non-Hispanic Americans money. I called them Ethnic Agenda-Mongers. It’s even more obvious that Conservatism Inc. types like lobbyist Grover Norquist support the wealthy employer against the poor or even middle-class American worker. I called this species Crony Capitalists.

But now there’s a new evilmonger in sight—Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida. He is married to Columba Garnica Gallo, from Guanajato, Mexico, and is the father of the half-Mexican George P. Bush, who seems to have been indoctrinated by his mother as a Hispanic race warrior—he told a Hispanic Republican rally in 2000 that "She told me we have to fight for our race, we have to find the leaders who represent us". [Reuters, August 2, 2000]

In spite of these Hispanic credentials, Jeb Bush in a recent speech at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to the Majority conference accused Hispanic immigrants of being “more fertile” than regular Americans. (He and Columba have three grown children.) See Jeb Bush: U.S. economy needs immigrants because they’re ‘more fertile’, Aaron Blake, Washington Post, June 14, 2013.

Hold on a minute! Doesn’t Bush realize it is officially Hateful to refer to immigrant fertility?

Years ago, similarly referring to the extraordinary philoprogenitiveness of Mexican immigrants, Dr. John Tanton made the following very mild joke (in a private memo):

“On the demographic point: perhaps this is the first instance in which those with their pants up are going to get caught by those with their pants down!".[Memo To WITAN IV Attendees, October 10, 1986 (Link courtesy of the $PLC’s spymasters—see Dr. Tanton’s reply to the SPLC's attack on him)]

This quote gets over 11, 000 hits on Google, and was quoted in 21 actual printed books, mostly by left-wing Latino academics. (Sample titles: White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race  and Voices of the U.S. Latino Experience .)

Neocon princess Linda Chavez, hearing about this memo, resigned from the Official English group US English in a Politically Correct panic. She subsequently brought the story up in 2003, defending Arnold Schwarzenegger from charges of evil associations, saying she resigned because the memo’s reference to fertility (like Jeb, she has three children.) was “anti-Hispanic and anti-Catholic.” [English and Arnold, Townhall.com, August 20, 2003, see also Don't Listen To Linda Chavez, by Sam Francis, August 28, 2003]

So now that Jeb Bush has said the same thing about immigrant fertility that Dr. Tanton said, can Linda Chavez resign from the Republican Party? Please?

I’m joking, of course. Jeb Bush’s speech was full of hateful

Next year should be a banner year for the GOP, and may yet be.

Obamacare, a "train wreck" about to happen, says Democratic Sen. Max Baucus, goes into full effect Jan. 1, with the popular IRS as enforcer.

The Obama media feel betrayed by the secret intrusions on First Amendment rights. Libertarians see the National Security Agency's data mining as a massive violation of Fourth Amendment rights.

The White House is bedeviled by scandals, the second-term curse has caught up with the Obama presidency, and prospects for the U.S. economy seem dicier than a few months ago.

History is also on the GOP's side. In the second midterm elections, Presidents Wilson, FDR, Eisenhower, JFK-LBJ, Nixon-Ford, Reagan and Bush II all suffered big losses. It has become a tradition.

But if the GOP is favored to hold the House and make gains in the Senate, the long-term prognosis for the party remains grim.

First, libertarianism is breaking up that old gang of mine.

Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham call for air strikes on Syria. But no echo is heard, as the Republican Party becomes anti-interventionist.

Yet the acid test comes after Friday's Iranian election, as the neocon war drums begin to beat.

Libertarian Republicans believe the National Security Agency is Big Brother and the Brave New World at hand. National security Republicans back the agency's right to access private data banks to protect us from terrorism.

On how to deal with 12 million illegal aliens—send them home or grant them amnesty and a "path to citizenship"—the party's rancorous division will be starkly visible when the bill reaches the House.

But the existential crisis of the GOP, from which it has turned its eyes away since George H.W. Bush, is demography.

Yet the matter cannot be avoided now, for it is on page one.

"White Numbers Shrink," was the headline on the lead story in USA Today. "More Whites Dying Than Being Born," blared The Wall Street Journal. What does this mean?

In demographic terms, more white Americans died in 2012 than were born. Never before—not during the Civil War bloodletting, not during the influenza epidemic after World War I, not during th

One can never have enough lessons in humility. A month or so after publishing a book titled From the Dissident Right, last weekend I found myself among some real dissidents.

This was the dinner for Professor Zhang Yitang I mentioned here. Prof. Zhang is currently famous for having cracked an outstanding mathematical problem earlier this year. [Solving a Riddle of Primes, By Kenneth Chang, NYT, May 20, 2013] The dinner was organized by old friends of his—mainland Chinese who had, like him, come to study in the U.S.A. in the 1980s. Most of them had had some association with the Chinese Alliance for Democracy, which flourished in the 1980s and 1990s among expatriate Chinese intellectuals.

It was humbling to be among these people. One fellow diner had spent eleven years in jail, much of it in solitary confinement. Another had been imprisoned for four years at the age of sixteen after participating in the 1978-79 “Democracy Wall” movement. (She now works for a New York-registered foundation, Women’s Rights In China.)

The word “dissident” may be etymologically correct for those of us Americans who sit apart when the community singing is going on, but it seems a tad impertinent in company like this.

Although the general mood was one of celebration for Prof. Zhang’s achievement, there was a whiff of melancholy about the occasion. The democracy movement’s U.S. branch has quiesced; their magazine has suspended publication; the activists have built lives and careers for themselves here in the U.S.A. and drifted away from each other.

One of them remarked to me wistfully at the dinner that it had been many years since she’d seen so many of that generation of dissidents all together in one place.

It didn’t help that last week marked the 24^th anniversary of the Chinese government’s crushing of the student movement in Tiananmen Square. Twenty-four may not seem like a very round number to Westerners, but it is precisely two duodecadal cycles of the traditional Chinese calendar: 1989 and 2013 are both Years of the Snake. My dinner partners had it in mind.

In the context of U.S. politics, this was also the week when China’s new leader Xi Jinping paid a call on Barack Obama, while Chinese blogs had just got through batting around some controversial remarks Joe Biden made at a commencement speech last month. (The remarks went unnoticed here—who pays attention to anything Joe Biden says?—but caused a stir over there.)

It has therefore been with China on my mind that I’ve been watching the SchMcGRubio Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill drag its weary length along through the U.S. Senate chamber.

For better or worse, our two nations look set to dominate geopolitics across the next few years, yoked together in a to-and-fro dance of mutual dependency and mutual suspicion.

Some problems we have that they don’t, mainly our vast and unsustainable public debt. Some they have that we don’t: massive environmental degradation, restless border colonies. We also have some problems in common: slowing economies, unemployed college graduates, widening wealth gaps.

(Class resentment in China when I lived there 30 years ago was aimed at the gao-gan-zi-di—the “princeling” offspring of senior Party officials and old revolutionaries. Nowadays there is a whole menagerie of spoiled brats: fu-er-dai, guan-er-dai, xing-er-dai, hong-er-dai…I find it hard to remember which is which. There’s a taxonomy here.)

And then, in the longer term, there are the prospects of demographic disaster,

Seems like the big boys in government and business and their ethnic auxiliaries have settled in on a multiplicity of efforts to make life for us average US citizens as complex and ugly as possible.

The Senate has “opened debate” on S. 744, the nation-breaking Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill—the first crucial vote comes at 2.15 pm today, June 11—but the Main Stream Media knows that the only way it will pass is if debate is closed. Politico did its part with a recent piece cheer-leading the environmentalist movement’s sell-out to the Treason Lobby: Greens move to heal immigration reform rift , By Darren Samuelsohn,[ email  him] June 2, 2013.

Environmentalists are getting off the sidelines and backing immigration reform — but it wasn’t easy.

During the Senate’s last go round on the issue in 2007, greens stayed silent to avoid airing their dirty laundry — an internal dispute that some in the movement feared would be seen as racist.

Their family feud was so rough that it twice nearly ruptured the Sierra Club when a vocal faction — including some of the movement’s leading luminaries — argued too many new immigrants living the American dream could spell doom for the planet.

Fast forward to 2013, and the Sierra Club, BlueGreen Alliance and Greenpeace are among those out publicly in support of the kinds of comprehensive immigration reform measures pursued by President Barack Obama and the Senate’s Gang of Eight. [Links added by VDARE.com ]

I was part of that “vocal faction” in 2004 and documented our struggle at VDARE.com in a series of articles. We were merely honest environmentalists who remembered the obvious truth, which had been the Sierra Club’s historical position for 30 years, that more people represent increased strain on America's natural resources.

But, as it subsequently turned out, the Sierra Club management had been simply (and secretly) bribed to switch sides. Wealthy investor David Gelbaum specified the strings attached to his $100 million donation: “I did tell [Executive Director] Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me.”[The Man Behind the Land,  By Kenneth R. Weiss, Los Angeles Times, Oct 27, 2004).

The Sierra Club obediently fell into line, with a new official policy in 1996 of “neutrality” on immigration and population growth. A group of grassroots members (SUSPS) attempted to overturn the change. But after years of effort, they learned that the fix was in. The Sierra Club's leadership simply ignored its own democratic processes and demonized its own members as, guess what, “racists.”

Note, however, that the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge cheerleaders still need to smear their opposition. Thus Politico’s Samuelsohn charges that the anti-immigration “faction” said immigrants would “doom the planet.” Absurd. We just pointed out that admitting millions from the Third World would greatly increase their use of natural resources compared to what they would have used at home. Immigrants don’t relocate for the better recycling opportunities; they want to become part of the American consumer economy and buy lots of manufactured stuff.

Even more absurd, Samuelsohn swallows whole the Environmentalist Establishment's ludicrous rationale:

Atop their list of reasons why: the prospect of 11 million new green-minded voters.

Of course, Illiterate Mexicans from the countryside are not “green” in any sense.

But the “Greens” at least understand what Grover Norquist and company ignore, that most Hispanics prefer big government and the Democratic Party. In fact, a 2012 Pew poll found that Hispanic predilection for welfare-style governance lasts for generations. In the eyes of the Sierra Club and their cronies, “environmentalism” simply means voting for Barack Obama.

The liberal bureaucrats who have captured the Sierra Club once blogged, “Yep, We’re Too White” and claim to see more diversity as a worthwhile goal. But no white leader of the organization has ever volunteered to resign from a well-paid position so a diverse person could take it.

 Instead, executive director Michael Brune [ email]  appeared in Politico:

“Right now, there are 11 million people who don’t have the tools, who can’t act without fear. They can’t vote. They can’t engage in the public process. They can’t advocate for clean energy without the threat of deportation,” Brune added. “Nobody should live under those circumstances.”

Apparently, we are supposed to believe illegals are longing to hit the streets and “advocate for clean energy.” But in fact, they already demonstrate frequently in public—but with demands for legalization and access to American jobs.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer welcomed the greens’ entry to the debate, noting that illegal immigrants often live and work in places that are more vulnerable than the general population to higher levels of air, water and soil pollution. But they can’t speak up now for fear of deportation.

Illegals “can’t speak up for fear of deportation”? Loudmouth illegal alien Jose Antonio Vargas testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last February and no officers stepped in to cuff the guy. Apparently, Barbara Boxer doesn't even notice what goes on in her own workplace.

Environmentalists say their work on the immigration issue also gives them solid ground to stand on as they engage on issues intertwined in this legislative fight.

Several progressive and green groups pulled their ads off of Facebook in early May to protest pro-oil, anti-Obamacare ads sponsored by a subsidiary of Mark Zuckerberg’s immigration reform campaign.

It can be challenging to keep up with enviros’ relationship to industry. Previous Executive Director Carl Pope stirred up controversy when he partnered with Clorox to give it the Sierra Club endorsement with a seal of approval on products, aka Green Works. In return, Clorox “donated” $470,000 to the Club in 2009 to help with its environmental issues.

When the Florida chapter of the Club had a problem with the unprecedented product endorsement, the head office in San Francisco suspended the entire state chapter of 35,000 members for four years.

Resistance Is Futile! to anyone threatening the Sierra Club’s connection with a wealthy donor.

In 1997-98, the Sierra Club faced a mutiny from within its own ranks over whether to end a long-standing position of neutrality on immigration. The question: whether to back a new stance favoring “an end to U.S. population growth at the earliest possible time through reduction in natural increase (births minus deaths)” and “through reduction in net immigration.”

Several environmental heavyweights, including former Kennedy and Johnson administration Interior Secretary Stewart Udall, Earth Day founder and former Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Gaylord Nelson, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson and Earth First co-founder Dave Foreman, spoke up for the ballot initiative.

This is often forgotten, several years after the fact. Many serious conservationists were endorsers of the immigration limitation reformers, despite pressure from Sierra Club bureaucrats, who were focused on liberal loyalties and future donations. Additional endorsers included: Prof. Al Bartlett (famous for his arithmetic, population, energy lecture), Lester Brown (the environment author and founder of Worldwatch Institute), California Congressman Tony Beilenson, the late, iconic nature photographer Galen Rowell and many others.

But it went down

This week, the full U.S. Senate is debating S.744, “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” a.k.a. the Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill. What is at stake is not merely the dispossession of the historic American nation—but its extinction.

The Open Borders Lobby, both “Left” and “Right,” has one implicit theme when it comes to labor and immigration—traditional Americans don't count.

Thus, just as for years the government has been “disappearing” crime, it has also been “disappearing” unemployment. The official unemployment rate is now “only” 7.6 percent (11.8 million), the real combined rate of unemployment and underemployment, according to Shadowstats’ John Williams, is 22.9 percent (over 30 million?).

My mom is a Depression baby, born two months after Black Tuesday. Her view is that a “recovery” meant that the jobless had found work again.

But now the fashionable talk is of something called a “jobless recovery.”  The millions of remaining unemployed have become invisible. This practice began under Bill Clinton and was maintained by George W. Bush, both aiming to benefit politically from “good” numbers. The Main Stream Media is complicit—thus between 2001 and 2010, America lost 2.8 million jobs to Red China alone (PDF) with the subject all but ignored in the public debate.

You don’t have to take my word for it—even professional token conservative David Frum noted this indifference recently in the Daily Beast [D.C. Decides That Unemployment Is So 2009, May 15, 2013]:

The one major administration measure that has any chance of passage this year could not be more perfectly designed to worsen the problems of the long-term unemployed: the Rubio-Schumer immigration reform… The bill guarantees—is intended to guarantee—ultra-slack labor markets across a wide variety of specializations for years and decades to come.

That heresy is no doubt why Frum has since been fired.

If the Amnesty/Immigration surge bill passes both houses of Congress and is signed into law, there will be catastrophic consequences. As many as 24 to 44 million new legal workers—plus anywhere from 120 to 220 million new “Americans” will be added via chain migration.

Critically, these government-sponsored invaders will enjoy a host of government-originated privileges and programs denied to actual Americans—especially whites.

• Amnestied invaders and their relatives will enjoy Affirmative Action at all skill and educational levels (even South Asians are eligible), along with American blacks. The white American working class will be discriminated against throughout the job market.
• Millions of amnestied foreign invaders will quit working in agriculture, and seek to move up, either to private service jobs (restaurants, bars, fast-food, hotels), construction, or other jobs to which working class Americans are desperately trying to cling.
• Millions of new illegal alien invaders and “temporary guest workers” will flood in to fill the jobs just left by the amnestied invaders, meaning that even agricultural jobs will be off-limits
• Traditional Americans, especially native-born whites, will find themselves under increasing pressure to attend college, even if they have no interest in it, because of this ethnic cleansing of working class jobs. When they graduate, they will be trapped by immense student loan debt. They will then find themselves under pressure to attend graduate school, for yet another worthless degree, requiring even more debt.
• If amnestied invaders decide to attend college, they will receive preferential admission and enjoy grade inflation (also here), allowing them to get better jobs than native-born white Americans;
• Anti-white discrimination in academia and the culture will be dramatically strengthened. Jobs for professors are notoriously being reduced, as universities chop up formerly full-time teaching jobs into part-time adjunct positions. But also, and much less well-publicized: academia has been on a simultaneous hiring binge, creating well-paid, non-teaching positions in what Alan Kors and Harvey Silverglate call, in their eponymous book, The Shadow University —the anti-white, minority and homosexual/feminist-dominated political fiefdoms like “Student Life” and “Multicultural Services” that are reserved for commissars who are anti-white, anti-intellectual, and of dubious educational attainment.

(I’ve reported on one characteristic activity of the Shadow University: promoting hate crime hoaxes to intimidate whites and extort ever-expanding power and budgets).

Amnesty will strengthen these trends, made it more difficult for Americans (especially whites) to receive a real education, and increase discrimination against them.

• Public school districts have been importing teachers by the thousands

As an Evangelical, I’ve criticized the "Evangelical Immigration Table"—a self-appointed group of pro-amnesty Protestant churchmen—repeatedly. In February, I called them a “Treason Lobby Front”.

Recently, Mike Flynn on Breitbart.com revealed that this is true in the most literal sense

The Evangelical Immigration Table, a coalition supporting immigration reform, has launched a six-figure ad campaign pushing Congress to enact immigration legislation. The ads, urging evangelicals to "pray" for a path to citizenship, include the disclaimer that they were "paid for" by the Table. This is odd, because the group doesn't legally exist. It is a highly misleading claim. 

Breitbart News confirmed on Monday that the actual purchase of the ads was made by the National Immigration Forum (NIF).  

Evangelicals Mislead on Funding of Immigration Ads, June 3 2013

Flynn goes on to explain that National Immigration Forum has received a lot of money from George Soros—as has the “Evangelical Immigration Table” itself. [National Immigration Forum Funded by Soros and the Left, by Matthew Boyle, Breitbart.com, June 3 2013] The Forum has also received a lot of money from hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer,  a big GOP donor.

During the past few months, unusually, several positive Main Stream Media articles about evangelicals have appeared, celebrating the (supposed) support of Evangelical Christians for Amnesty. For example:

• Evangelical groups launch $250,000 immigration campaign by Alan Gomez, USA Today, May 29, 2013

It’s about the quarter-million dollar media push by the Evangelical Immigration Table, mentioned above. To be fair, this article does present another point of view and quotes NumbersUSA’s Roy Beck. But it fails ask the question “Where is the $250,000 coming from?”

• Why Evangelicals Back Obama on Immigration (and Why They Should Agree on Guns and Climate Change, Too)  by Ron Fournier, National Journal, April 15, 2013 (updated May 30)

Subtitled “Pragmatic mega-church leaders are savvy about demographic shifts.” Yeah.

• For Evangelicals, a Shift in Views on Immigration by Julia Preston, New York Times, April 13, 2013

Two years ago, national evangelical leaders began to speak out in favor of legislation to give legal status to immigrants in the United States illegally. Now, as Congress is about to start a debate on overhauling the immigration system, conservative Christians, once inclined to take a hard line on immigrants they viewed as lawbreakers, are consulting their Bibles and coming around to the pastors’ view.”

Yeah again. But to Julia Preston’s credit, she points out that

In a poll released in March by the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution, white evangelical Protestants were the least likely of the religious groups surveyed to support a path to citizenship for immigrants here illegally, with 56 percent of them favoring that approach. Among Hispanic Catholics, the group expressing the most support, 74 percent said they would allow those immigrants to become citizens. Only 41 percent of white evangelicals who identify with the Tea Party supported a path to citizenship, according to the survey.

Miriam Jordan, who has always done pro-immigration reporting, is now doing pro-evangelical reporting.

• Evangelicals Push Immigration Path, Wall Street Journal, April 8, 2013

After decades of sitting on the sidelines of the debate, evangelical Christians are prodding Republican lawmakers to support a path to U.S. citizenship for the nation's illegal immigrants, based on their reading of Bible teachings. Evangelical pastors from pulpits across the U.S. cite Scriptures about welcoming strangers. Some compare illegal immigrants with modern-day lepers, who should be treated with compassion by Christians.

Hmm. Sorry to break this to you, Miriam, but some of them actually are modern-day lepers.

• Evangelicals Try To Soften Hearts On Overhauling Immigration, By John Burnett, NPR April 15, 2013,

“Evangelical Christians in the United States are raising their voices in support of immigration overhaul. Church leaders were largely mute during the earlier contentious debates over how to fix the nation's immigration laws, but now they are speaking out, telling conservative Christians and their friends in Congress that it's OK to embrace compassionate solutions.”

• Evangelicals Rally for Pathway to Citizenship and Immigration Reform, by Sarah McCaney, PBS, April 23, 2013
• An Evangelical’s Call for Immigration Reform by Carl A. Ruby, Tikkun, May 3, 2013

(Carl Ruby, whose website says he is "currently serving as a consultant for the National Immigration Forum" is an evangelical Amnesty booster who says he was inspired by Martin Luther King, Jr. to support