Category Archives: IMMIGRATION

UPDATED: J. D. Hayworth Betrayed

Conservatism, IMMIGRATION, John McCain, Republicans, Sarah Palin

In addition to their creedal Keynesianism, another measure of the movement conservatives is the manner in which they betrayed J. D. Hayworth, who ought to have beat Senator John McCain in the Arizona GOP primary. Hayworth had a strong record as an immigration patriot—his was not a “desperate lurch to the right,” for electoral expediency as was McCain’s successful bid.

Read VDARE’s Washington Watcher’s analysis of the one-two punch Hayworth sustained from Palin, Brewer, and the gang at Fox:

“… no Beltway groups endorsed [Hayworth]. Mark Levin and Michelle Malkin supported J.D., but few other prominent conservative personalities supported him. This is despite Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, etc. repeatedly stating how important it is for us to support ‘true’ conservatives over liberal Republicans.

Without any major conservative help, the fact that Hayworth raised 3 million dollars was an accomplishment. But that cannot fight McCain’s $20+ million.

“Not only did most conservatives fail support Hayworth, many went to bat for John McCain.

The NRA, Arizona Right to Life and, (in an unusual but all-too-typical move), National Review, all endorsed him.

Most effectively for McCain, the two most significant people for the Arizona Republican base, Sarah Palin and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (benefiting, arguably undeservedly, from signing SB 1070) actively campaigned for him.”

UPDATE (Aug. 29): John McCain wanted everyone to believe that he has only just stumbled into the fleshpots of Washington. And Arizonans did, despite the fact that McMussolini was right by Bush’s side as the latter presided over the greatest expansion of government since Lyndon B. Johnson.

McCain had informed Hannity (who didn’t seem to mind) that he’d resume his work for amnesty as soon as the border was secure, which is, by my calculations, round about NOW—the time of the senior senator’s GOP renomination.

Greg is right. Arizonans have chosen their political poison. Alas, it will percolate into our drinking water as well.

Now comes confirmation, via CNSNews.com, that the Obama administration has resolved “not to build the border fence and to follow a catch-and-release policy with illegal aliens.” It goes without saying that “Recent steps the administration has taken regarding the border, including the deployment of 520 National Guard troops in Arizona,” have been “insufficient and amounted to ineffective pre-election posturing.”

The next defining date for Mr. McCain: the Tuesday following the first Monday, in November, when both houses will probably be stormed by Repbulicans. Then, it’ll be time for talk amnesty again. You do know that the economy will have turned around on that day too.

And Dana and SE Cupp will have grown a brain (not to mention a facility with economics and rational thought). If you believe all that … here I’ll leave it up to you the reader to fill in with one of those underwater property-sale jokes (let’s have some southern ones, please, to lift sagging spirits).

UPDATED: It Takes An Indian

History, IMMIGRATION, Judaism & Jews, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Multiculturalism, Nationhood

To tell it like it is. An American Indian. This may be well-ploughed territory to readers of this space, but it can’t be said often enough. “America is not a nation of immigrants. America is a nation of White Anglo-Saxon Protestants,” writes David Yeagley at AltRight. “Everyone else is an immigrant. Even the early Celtic add-ons were not part of the foundations. The later Irish Catholic immigrants were most definitely not part of the foundations. The social order, that is, the government of the colonies, and that system which distilled into the Declaration of Independence, was created by White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. The Constitution of the United States of America is the work of Englishman who separated themselves, by war, from their home country.”

“Modern descendants of the Scots, the Irish, the Germans, the Italians, the Jews, etc., are first to declare that America is a nation of immigrants. This is their self-protection. Therefore this is their talking point when it comes to addressing the issue of immigration in general. But their mantra ‘America is a nation of immigrants’ only justifies their own presence here. The fact is, these people are all additions, not founders. All of the early immigrants, besides the Jews, have of course blended themselves into the founding sentiments. It was easier for the Scots than anyone else, because they were ‘British’ anyway.”

***
About left-liberal Jewish strategising, which is no different to the wimpy, lemming’s lunacy evinced by their WASP counterparts, THE BAD EAGLE says the following:

At this point, the argument that other non-WASP groups must be nurtured and honored by the Jew, in order for the Jew to protect himself from persecution, is a dangerous argument, and really ought to be dropped. It invites anti-Americanism. This in turn invites anti-Semitism

The argument is also self-defeating, as I observed in my 2003 “BLAME THE JEWS”:

“MacDonald’s assertion that Jews support open immigration policies so that they can bring about a more diverse society in order to diminish anti-Semitism and promote ‘Jewish ethnic interests’ must be questioned, especially in the post-September 11 world.”

Jews have little to gain by advocating for minority communities with which they haven’t much in common, culturally or socioeconomically, and who are likely to be hostile to them. How does promoting immigration from Muslim countries, for instance, benefit Jewish interests?
Jewish activism, if anything, is self-defeating as a group strategy. The community’s egalitarianism is thus more accurately seen as a function of liberal pathology, the same pathology so many Christian denominations exhibit – they all believe, mistakenly, that they are promoting ‘social justice.’
All in all, the paleoconservatives’ attempts to blame Jews for pervasive gentile madness, such as Mr. Bush’s war in Iraq, his lingering presence in Afghanistan, multiculturalism and ‘mass, non-traditional-immigration,’ is too silly to sustain, but, at the same time, a little sinister. (Next, MacDonald will hold Jews responsible for loading the Episcopal Church with homosexuals.)

[SNIP]

If you are interested, David interviewed me a while back, as part of a series of interviews with rightists about “Patriotism, Nationhood, and the American Indian.”

UPDATE (Aug. 15): From “Nation, State & Mass Immigration”:

“To say that America is a ‘nation of immigrants,’” writes commentator Lawrence Auster, “is to imply that there has never been an actual American people apart from immigration.”

It is to put America out of existence as a historically existing nation that immigrants and their children joined by coming here, a country with its own right to exist and to determine its own sovereign destiny—a right that includes the right to permit immigration or not. No patriot, no decent person who loves this country, as distinct from loving some whacked-out, anti-national, leftist idea of this country, would call it a ‘nation of immigrants.’

The people who established the American political order, described by Thomas Jefferson as “a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution … derived from natural right and natural reason,” were overwhelmingly British Christians. America’s Anglo-Saxon historical majority descends not from immigrants, but from English and Scots-Irish colonists. Over to Auster:

The immigrants of the late 19th and 20th centuries came to an American nation that had already been formed by those colonists and their descendants. Therefore to call America ‘a nation of immigrants’ is to suggest that America, prior to the late 19th-century wave of European immigration, was not America.”

It Takes A Man …

Ilana Mercer, IMMIGRATION, Iraq, Just War, Military, Neoconservatism, Republicans, Ron Paul, War

My colleague Vox Day penned an important column about foreign policy, last week. Sadly, his “Better Late Than Never” WND piece will be ignored by the self-satisfied conservative Idiocracy, which has an allergy to truth and reason.

“The so-called ‘isolationist’ Right had it right all along. Neither Saddam Hussein nor the Taliban ever presented one-tenth the danger to Americans that criminal immigrants, legal and illegal, pose to them. And yet the conservative media has been willing to spend more than $1 trillion on replacing a secular socialist government with a radical Shiite one and expelling a Taliban government in favor of one that is merely Taliban-influenced while nonsensically continuing to call for more immigration.

“But the fact is that there is absolutely no past or present justification for the invasions of either Afghanistan or Iraq when considered from the perspective of the American national interest. One could make a much more rational national-security case for declaring war against Mexico, Canada or even Honduras. And there is absolutely no justification for the continued military occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq nine and seven years on.”

Vox expresses regret for his initial support for the war and points out the signal significance of Joseph Farah’s recent renunciation of the current errant foreign policy.

The following words I especially appreciated:

Only a very few commentators, such as Antiwar.com’s Justin Raimondo and WorldNetDaily’s own Pat Buchanan and Ilana Mercer, can truly say that they were opposed from the start to the expensive, unconstitutional and ultimately useless abuses of the American military that have been inflicted upon it by Republican and Democratic commanders in chief over the last nine years.

It takes a man …

UPDATED: Obama And Bush: Partners In Government Giganticism

Barack Obama, Bush, Economy, Fascism, Foreign Policy, Government, IMMIGRATION, Justice, Law, Political Economy, Regulation, Republicans, States' Rights

The following is from “Obama And Bush: Partners In Government Giganticism,” now on WND.Com:

“Sean Hannity wants to know how Arlen Specter could go from ‘supporting George Bush, in some years 80-90 percent of the time, to supporting Barack Obama 96 percent of the time, considering the two men’s principles – their core values, their belief system – are in diametrical opposition.’

They are? How so? …

Bush pursued wars that have contributed to the bankrupting of this country and the death of thousands of innocents. Obama has sustained the same momentum in those far-flung occupied lands. The gabbers on television who coo and kvetch nostalgic about Bush’s virtues should console themselves thus: Yes, The Decider was the originator; Obama nothing but a second-hander. But give Barack a break. The 44th president may not be as blessed with killer core values as the 43rd. But he’s doing his best. Has he not expanded the one theatre (Afghanistan) to compensate for drawing down in the other (Iraq)? …

Moocher Obama has pulled ahead of Looter Bush with respect to deficits and debt. The Bush budget for 2009 was a trivial $3 trillion, while Obama’s 2010 budget was a respectable $3.5 trillion. According to “Bankrupting America,” “Bush doubled the debt to almost $6 trillion and Obama’s plans would leave us with an IOU of an additional $8.5 trillion by 2020.”

C’mon. Six trillion; 8 trillion: the act of racking up such financial liabilities exists on a continuum of criminality ? it does not constitute a difference in kind (or in “core values”).” …

Barack’s tidal wave of regulation is hard to beat … But a second-best to BHO The Regulator is not to be sneezed at. The Decider is still in the running for America’s Best Enforcer (a very bad thing indeed). …”

The complete column is “Obama And Bush: Partners In Government Giganticism.

Read my libertarian manifesto, Broad Sides: One Woman’s Clash With A Corrupt Society.

The Second Edition features bonus material and reviews. Get your copy (or copies) now!

UPDATE (Aug. 6): DICK’S DOCTOR. I mentioned Dick Cheney in the column:

“Barack’s tidal wave of regulation is hard to beat – in particular the financial-reform bill, which goes beyond Dick Cheney’s wildest dreams in increasing the overweening powers of the executive branch. (Barack will be able to seize a firm he designates as systemically risky.)”

Even Dick’s doctor is a mini-dictator. My ears perked up. I heard someone talk about federal law preempting state law. No, this was not a discussion of Arizona’s SB 1070. There was more muttering about compelling drug stores, at the pains of punishment (for that is what a new law means) to carry defibrillators. I was, in fact, listening to a snippet from an interview cardiac surgeon to Mr. Cheney was giving to Liz, daughter to the dictator. In case Dick dropped while shopping in their aisles, the good doctor wanted the feds to compel certain outlets (not sure which) to carry the life-saving defibrillator.

Liz nodded.