Sometimes I think we earnest reformers in the cause of saving America should retire to the nearest drinking establishment and let the obnoxious opposition do the heavy lifting.

Is not the annoying Tamar Jacoby our secret weapon, particularly when she appears on television? Her message of open borders appeasement, delivered in a high-decibel shreik, surely propels many fence-sitters to the side of order and sovereignty. You go girl!

For a more diverse experience, check out this October video clip of MEChA types in Sacramento as they demand drivers licenses for illegals, expressing their desires and frustrations in the unique style of today’s Mexo-leftist: “License Illegal — Students and Community Organizers Protest in Sacramento”

An organizer named Luiz is typical. He complains that the Sen. Gil Cedillo proposal for DLs includes a different design for “immigrants” which Luiz says is “like what Hitler did with the Jews.” Only in America, those so designated get food stamps and healthcare rather than a trip to the gas chamber.

There’s also a well-fed fellow wearing a mask and revolutionary-themed t-shirt saying, “We are workers, not terrorists.” How reassuring. Do call the personnel manager ASAP!

Free speech — how sweet it is!

The headline above was what British editors used to write in the early days of the Twentieth Century, when they got tired of a lengthy argument in their letter columns.

The latest, and perhaps final installment of Sailer vs. Taylor will be up on the front page a little later tonight.

While Jared Taylor and Steve Sailer are having a real, and important argument, which goes to heart of what we call the National Question, I couldn’t help but be reminded of this story from G. K. Chesterton’s Autobiography:

… one of the most admirably absurd correspondences I have ever seen in the columns of journalism. It all began, if I remember right, with my brother writing something about the meeting between H. G. Wells and Booker Washington, the famous Negro publicist in America, in which some doubt was thrown on how far Mr. Wells understood the difficulties of Mr. Washington, and by inference those of the White South in which he worked. This view was enforced and exaggerated in a letter dated from Bexley, which warned everybody of the real dangers of racial admixture and intermarriage; it was signed “White Man.” This produced a fiery letter from Mr. Wells, humorously headed, “The White Man of Bexley,” as if the man were a sort of monster. Mr. Wells said he did not know what life was like “among the pure whites of Bexley,” but that elsewhere meeting people did not always mean marrying them; “The etiquette is calmer.” Then, I think, a real Negro intervened in the debate about his nature and destiny; and signed his letter, “Black Man.” Then came a more detached query, I should guess from some Brahmin or Parsee student at some college, pointing out that the racial problem was not confined to the races of Africa; and asking what view was taken of intermarriage with the races of Asia. He signed his letter “Brown Man.” Finally, there appeared a letter, of which I remember almost every word; for it was short and simple and touching in its appeal to larger and more tolerant ideals. It ran, I think, as follows:

“Sir, May I express my regret that you should continue a correspondence which causes considerable pain to many innocent persons who, by no fault of their own, but by the iron laws of nature, inherit a complexion uncommon among their fellow-creatures and attractive only to the elite. Surely we can forget all these differences; and, whatever our race or colour, work hand in hand for the broadening of the brotherhood of humanity. Yours faithfully, Mauve Man with Green Spots.”

This correspondence then ceased.
[The Autobiography Of G. K. Chesterton, Chapter 8]