I’m getting more than a little bit tired of this kind of nonsense [1] from people that ought to know better .
Via WorldNetDaily we have Ann Coulter in all her glory: Bush’s America: Roach motel [2] in which she rants about immigration.
The grandest irony in the piece is that in the second paragraph she ponders:
I don’t know why conservatives like Linda Chavez have to argue like liberals by smearing their opponents as racists.
She then launches into an incoherent argument that Ted Kennedy personally decided to change American immigration policies so as to increase the number of Third World natives in the US to affect “a dramatic chance in the nation’s demographics.” And his goal was to
radically transform the racial composition of the country. Instead of taking 15 immigrants from England and three from China, America would henceforth take three from England and 15 from China. Payback’s a bitch, Daughters of the American Revolution!
Coulter’s entire argument is wholly predicated on calling up bogeymen. First is the notion that this is all about Ted Kennedy, perhaps the member of Congress least liked by hardcore conservatives; and second the idea that there is some grand conspiracy to change American demographics (i.e., race). The almost nonsensical reference to the Daughter of the American Revolution is clearly an attempt to label this change as somehow a reversal of American ideals.
What this is based on, however, is rather unclear. I may not be a fan of Ted Kennedy’s, but the notion that he has been on some kind of subversive anti-American crusade since 1965 is beyond ludicrous.
Steven, your statement doesn’t mesh with the facts. Kennedy has in fact been on such a crusade. And for quite a bit longer than 1965. He’s also been for a number of years in flagrant violation of our laws. One that I can consider blatantly obvious is the law as regards Murder.
Had you forgotten?
More, however, to the point, is this charge of racism that so often gets leveled, and in this case was repeated by somebody who ought to know better, namely Steven Taylor.
He argues, of course,
My point is that a human being is a human being and all are equally capable of being fully American and adhering to the ideals of America.
All very politically correct, and axiomatic… bumper- sticker- ish, in fact.
But let’s dig deeper, shall we?
Capable, perhaps. But do they have the desire? The number of groups that are saying very loudly that they intend to take over and dismantle our society, suggests not.
Let’s get this straight; Race has nothing to do with this. Indeed; Personally, I wouldn’t mind opening up the border two people who want to become citizens. But that’s not the issue, here.
The issue is the much larger number of people who want to come here grab the money take over what of our society they can whilst sending the money to Mexico. Such people have made themselves into the face of the immigration debate. But this is a false image.
They have come here in large numbers and demanding that we speak their language, that we change our government schools to teach what they think is important, they want access to all the laws that they like such as welfare programs, housing subsidy, school subsidy, Social Security etc. etc. and then the laws that they don’t think should apply to them such as immigration, tax laws, car registrations, insurance requirements, and so on they flat out ignore.
Rather like Senator Oldsmobile, huh?
That point aside, somehow this doesn’t strike me as wanting to be a “citizen”. Are you really saying that this is something that we shouldn’t have a say in? All of this becomes a matter for the American taxpayer to fund, but apparently they are not allowed to object… if they do they’re tagged as ‘racist’.
Such a charge misdirects the conversation, perhaps intentionally so on the part of some. For example, the aforementioned Hispanic groups.
The sad part is, Steven, that you know better. Or you should. We’re not dealing with matters of race. We’re dealing with matters of culture, and the continuance of America as such. Quit leaning on the crutch of “you’re being a racist”. The false pretext, does your argument no good whatever.
On the other hand, without that false pretext, what would your argument be, then?