At the urging of Patrick Cleburne in his blog, Attention From the MSM, I wrote to Cynthia Tucker who seems to have a particularly hard and thick skull when it comes to illegal immigration. She knows immigrants who like baseball; ergo, all immigrants, legal or not, are good.

Tucker represents one of the immigration reform movement’s biggest problems. She’s black; we’re mostly white. Illegal immigrants are mostly brown. Tucker will take brown over white any day.

The difference is we have tangible facts on our side. Tucker only has emotion.

Maybe Tucker is the racist in the room?

Enlightened blacks, which Tucker is not, have an entirely different view of illegal immigration.

In my letter to Tucker, I introduce her to Gregory A. Butler, a black carpenter from New York and member of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, who I interviewed for two VDARE.COM columns.

Butler’s opinion is that illegal immigrants have ruined the wage scale in his profession.

Here’s my letter to the AJC:

I see that Cynthia Tucker is once again on the attack against Americans like my friend and VDARE.COM collegue D.A. King who feel that illegal immigration is totally out of control.

Ms Tucker knows some immigrants–once illegal–that are now citizens and enjoy baseball. Hence we federal immigration policy should revolve around the behavior of her circle of friends? Certainly Tucker is aware of, if she does not know them personally, illegal aliens who don’t have such an innocent profile.

I am dismayed that Ms. Tucker, who is proud of being an African-American, has not deduced that illegal immigration is ruining opportunities for her fellow blacks.

In two of my “right-wing, invective-filled” (as Tucker referred to them) VDARE columns, I interviewed Gregory A. Butler, a black construction worker and card carrying member of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, who told me that illegal immigration had destroyed the once decent wage scale in his profession. I suggest Ms. Tucker read my columns.

I will gladly travel at my own expense from California to Atlanta to debate Tucker at any time at the forum of her choice about the pros and cons of illegal immigration.

Tucker has strong opinions and so do I. Let’s see who comes out ahead.

Frequent VDARE.com contributor D.A. King is on a roll. On Friday The New York Times featured him in a story on Georgia’s highly commendable Security and Immigration Compliance Act [In Georgia Law, a Wide-Angle View of Immigration , By Rick Lyman May 12, 2006]. And today he has the honor of being smeared (yet again) by Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Cynthia Tucker; [Living Proof Of Immigration’s Marvelousness May 12, 2006]

This Georgia law is clearly something to be brought to the attention of every State Legislature.

Ann Morse, director of the Immigrant Policy Project at the National Conference of State Legislatures, said no other state had gone so far as Georgia in trying to restrict immigrant benefits and rights since Proposition 187 in California (passed in 1994 and ruled unconstitutional four years later) and Proposition 200 in Arizona (passed in 2004). Both measure denied many social services to illegal immigrants.
“There are other bills in legislatures around the country that are somewhat comprehensive, but nothing as comprehensive as Georgia’s,” Ms. Morse said.
This came about, the bill’s author said, because Republican leaders in Georgia decided that public support was growing for such an initiative.
“We decided that the best thing to do was to take a lot of ideas and put them together in one bill,” said State Senator Chip Rogers, a Republican representing some of Atlanta’s far northern suburbs, who wrote the new law and spearheaded its passage

On D.A.King:

D. A. King… [who] has become one of the most prominent voices for the new legislation, said …Washington has failed to act. “The Georgia legislation is a direct result of the federal government’s refusal to secure our borders in the war on terror and to get illegal immigration under control,”

Cynthia Tucker’s piece, sadly, appears to be a fine example of J.P.Rushton’s contention that the possession of verbal fluency causes a systematic overestimation of the intellect of many blacks. Her argument essentially is that because she is related to some nice immigrants, therefore immigration is a good thing. One should consequently ignore

xenophobes such as D.A. King, a Cobb County man who has emerged as one of the loudest local critics of illegal immigrants. Though he insists he supports legal immigration, he rails against cultural change.
A frequent contributor to a right-wing, invective-filled Web site called VDARE.com…[VDARE.com note: EVIL! ]

This despite the fact she recently wrote a perfectly reasonable column decrying the demoralization of young black men even in the small town South, and noting the damaging effect of the work place competition they experience from more biddable Hispanic immigrants. Idle black men, tragically, aren’t just a stereotype ajc.com published on 04/16/06]

This kind of triumph of emotion over intellect, asserted in public policy, is what may well yet turn America into Haiti. - or at least, a Third World slum.

Tell Cynthia Tucker

Tom Wolfe is the Jefferson Lecturer at the National Endowment for the Humanities. He has a interesting point about Latin pride and immigration:

More recently, I returned to Washington and Lee for a conference on the subject of Latin American writing in the United States. The conference soon became a general and much hotter discussion of the current immigration dispute. I had arrived believing that, for example, Mexicans who had gone to the trouble of coming to the United States legally, going through all the prescribed steps, would resent the fact that millions of Mexicans were now coming into the United States illegally across the desert border. I couldn’t have been more mistaken. I discovered that everyone who thought of himself as Latin, even people who had been in this country for two and three generations, were wholeheartedly in favor of immediate amnesty and immediate citizenship for all Mexicans who happened now to be in the United States. And this feeling had nothing to do with immigration policy itself, nothing to do with law, nothing to do with politics, for that matter. To them, this was not a debate about immigration. The very existence of the debate itself was to them a besmirching of their fiction-absolute, of their conception of themselves as Latins. Somehow the debate, simply as a debate, cast an aspersion upon all Latins, implying doubt about their fitness to be within the border of such a superior nation.

Steve Sailer is impressed by LAPD wanted felon Vanessa Etourneau, a French girl with serious cheekbones.[The Hot White Defendant] Personally, I feel that Corinna Kowalsky, who I mentioned in previous Most Wanted blogging, is practically the only felon on the list who could lift your wallet and make you feel good about it afterwards.

During the Presidential debates, Bush talked about helping employers to “mate up” with willing workers, which Steve said sounded like he was trying to remove impediments to the white slave trade. Which, of course, is part of the effect of porous borders. Steve wrote

I can just imagine that speech:

“My fellow Americans, it has come to my attention that Eastern Europe—the Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Russia, Lithuania — is full of nubile young ladies with hair the color of wheat ripening in the sun…

Yes, that would be popular, but as a practical matter, it’s alleged that the charming but illegal Ms. Kowalsky “befriended the victim and then later burglarized his residence taking various items of art, silver and porcelain.