Fred Thompson is not looking like the great conservative hope which many have imagined. His hiring of open-borders henchman Spencer Abraham should be a dash of cold water on any fantasies that Fred is the real deal for a law-and-borders President. The writing is on the wall.

Acting campaign manager Tom Collamore will still advise Thompson, but his presidential operation will be run by the duo of former senator and energy secretary Spencer Abraham and a Florida GOP strategist, Randy Enright, according to Rozett.
[Thompson Shakes Up Staff, The Guardian 7/24/07]

Before Abraham was energy secretary, he was the Senator from Michigan, who successfully led efforts to reduce the effectiveness of the 1996 reform legislation. He was defeated for re-election by Debbie Stabenow, in part because of his anti-enforcement politics.

How bad could Spencer Abraham be? In 1997, La Raza gave him its “Defender of the Melting Pot” award.

All you need to know.

The failures of the MSM to report responsibly on immigration are so widespread and well entrenched that it hardly seems worthwhile to mention them.

But with the hope that somehow, someone, somewhere–maybe an editor–will pay attention and insist his reporters, no matter their personal bias, adhere to their own established rules of journalism, I soldier on with my comment about the ludicrous story written by Mexico City native and Chicago’s ABC 7 Weekend General Assignment reporter, Michelle Gallardo.

Gallardo’s story, “Police Bust Large Pot Growing Operation,” stated that “two men” were arrested on charges of growing 20,000 marijuana plants with a street value of $4 million. The “men’s” names are Bernardo Rangel and Jose Verra.

A Chicago reader who has been following the Rangel and Verra story informs me that they are illegal aliens.

A close look at Gallardo’s biography tells a lot. In addition to being a native of Mexico, Gallardo formerly worked for Univision, CNN Espanol and hosted the community affairs program Primera Plana.

None of that excuses Gallardo’s reportorial oversights. Rangel and Verra are illegal aliens. That’s an integral part of the story. And, by the way, it makes the story more interesting than simply referring to them as “men.”

“Undocumented” is passé now…too revealing. “Man” is the word of choice.

For more insights into recent journalistic failures, read James Fulford’s blog here.

In 1979, I took a tour boat around Acapulco. The guide, a local lady, pointed at a house on top of the cliff overlooking the ocean and proudly announced: “The home of movie estar Yon Wen!”

After about five minutes, I finally figured out that “Yon Wen” was John Wayne.

The great cowboy actor was probably the most prominent Mexicophilic American of the 20th Century. All three of the Duke’s wives were from Latin America (Panama, Mexico, and Peru), and he loved making cowboy moves in Durango in Mexico, which looked a lot more like the Old West than anyplace in modern America. The movie closest to his heart, 1960’s The Alamo (which he produced and directed in an era when movie stars seldom did either), was highly sympathetic to the Mexicans.

As I mentioned in “Sunday in the Park with Jorge,” I’m ambivalent about Mexican machismo. I admire it in some ways, but not as much as John Wayne did.

One of the oddities of mass immigration from Mexico, however, is that, when praising the magic of diversity, almost nobody in liberal white America ever expresses any John Wayne-like appreciation for the stark Mexican sex role divide. The whole concept that Latin culture exaggerates natural sex differences just doesn’t seem to register in the mainstream media. Diversity is supposed to overcome stereotypes, not reinforce them, so bringing in more Mexicans must be a victory for feminists.

What’s even weirder is that the diversicrats are right on the political impact of this. Mass immigration from Mexico ultimately pushes power into the hands of the nanny state and the feminist establishment because Mexican immigrant dysfunction justifies huge numbers of government and foundation jobs for social workers. Further, macho Mexican-American politicians and activists find their white allies on the feminist-aligned left. For example, LA’s strutting mayor Antonio Villaraigosa long worked for the ACLU and has one of those silly gender-equal surnames combining his last name (Villar) with his long-suffering wife’s (Raigosa).

By the way, a reader writes:

I’ve spent a lot of time working with Mexicans and spent a lot of time in Mexico. Your observations are right on the mark. I’ve always thought that the Mexican practice of the “Pinata” at kids birthday parties was typically “mexican” and particularly dangerous to boot. A blindfolded kid wildly swinging a baseball bat at a paper mache’ donkey filled with candy while a whole bunch of kids wait just feet away to rush in and capture the candy……..That is if the kid swinging the bat stops swinging the bat when the candy starts to fall out of the Pinata. I’m sure there has been plenty of cracked skulls and concussions as a result of that Mexican funfest. But, hey!, que lastima! pobrecito! Traiga la nina al cuarto emergencia donde hay muchos gringos medicos. Todo es libre, tambien! (What a pity poor thing. Just take him to the emergency room where there are lots of American doctors. It’s all free too!)

Judging by the rave review on LewRockwell.com for Tom Woods’ most recent book 33 Questions About American History You’re Not Supposed to Ask, he has his audience nailed. (Encyclopedic Knowledge and Rapier Wit, by Kevin R. C. Gutzman, 7-23-2007)

And actually, I can see that it will be a useful book, especially for college students who are looking to ruffle a few feathers.

Wood’s book, following his New York Times bestseller, The Politically Incorrect Guide To American History, is divided into 33 essays answering questions like “Did Martin Luther King Jr. Oppose Affirmative Action?”, “Did Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Lift The United States Out Of The Depression?”, and “Should Americans Care About Historians’ Ranking of US Presidents?” There are several discussions of racial differences (although IQ is certainly never mentioned), government spending at home and abroad, and states’ rights. The essays themselves are solid, well-argued statements.

Most interesting to VDARE.com is the first chapter (and one listed on the front of the dust jacket) exploring whether the Founding Fathers’ supported immigration. The short answer is no, and to support it Woods has done his research. However, to Peter Brimelow’s great chagrin, Woods misses one important point: he quotes Benjamin Franklin’s much-mocked fear of too many German immigrants as evidence that the Founders had doubts about immigration, but does not note that Franklin was not proved wrong - German immigration ceased, and did not resume for nearly a century, one of many such pauses that have been critical to assimilation. Brimelow pointed this out in Alien Nation twelve years ago, but the mocking goes on.

At any rate, I’m pleased to see immigration get the attention Woods gives it. And I hope his message reaches many a LewRockwell.com libertarian in the process.

If you missed the Democratic debates on Youtube you didn’t miss much. Read this and you will know everything you need to know about these miserable louts. You can read the transcript at these two links because it’s in two parts. . [One,Two]
CNN has an online video if you want to watch.

Probably the most important part of the debate is what they didn’t talk about–which is just about anything of substance. Listed below are just a few of the topics that were avoided or obscured.

Did they say something about H-1B? No.

How about guest workers, visas, or other issues dealing with our border? No.

Did they say something meaningful about any immigration issue? No, but what they said is worse than terrible, and since it’s slightly off topic I’ll cover it at the end.

Did anyone connect immigration with declining wages or job opportunities? No, but everyone but Dodd said they would be willing to work for minimum wage.

Good thing, because that’s more than they are worth!

Was anything said about offshoring? No.

Not a single question about free trade or offshoring was asked but Kucinich slipped in about a 5 second blurb on the issue of trade. Apparently nobody that uses Youtube cares about free trade.

KUCINICH: So we’re not going to be borrowing money from China to fight wars in Baghdad. We’re going to lower our trade deficit by ending NAFTA and the WTO and going back to trade based on worker’s rights.

What about jobs? Youtube audiences are young, so perhaps it never occurred for them to ask about jobs, or perhaps the Democrats told CNN to screen out all questions about jobs. The dearth of questions is rather odd, especially since so many labor and immigration activists sent questions to Youtube.

About the only platitude we heard was that Obama wants to create millions of jobs by saving the environment, and Clinton thinks energy and global warming will create millions of jobs.

Did they have an excuse why the Democratic majority has looked the other way while Bush continues to give our jobs away by making insane “free trade” agreements? No.

So just what has Trade Promotion Authority got to do with anything? The CNN commentary following the debate was probably more interesting than anything the candidates had to say.

A psycho-analyst talked about why all the guys grabbed the podium (they were nervous), and why Clinton wore feminine colors (she is a woman).

Immigration was totally ignored, except for one thing — Dodd and Richardson want to give universal health care to illegal aliens. The other candidates like Obama and Clinton lucked out because Anderson Cooper somehow forgot to make them answer the question (Ooops!). Cooper’s dismissal of this question before the other candidates were required to answer is all the evidence I need to see that the entire debate was scripted. This is an excerpt from Part 2 of the transcript, SO GET YOUR BARF BAGS READY!

QUESTION: Hi, this is Lucia Ballie (ph) for a group of friends on the east side of L.A. And our question is: Does your health care plan cover undocumented workers?
QUESTION: Thank you.

COOPER: Senator Dodd?

DODD: First of all, I hope all of us get a chance to comment on this issue. This is a huge issue that deserves the attention and every candidate here ought to have the chance to talk about health care. [snipped Dodd dodging the issue] COOPER: Would your plan cover undocumented workers?

DODD: It would. People who live in this country — children certainly would be covered. And I’m in support of the immigration policy here that requires them to contribute so that…

COOPER: So that’s a yes?

DODD: If they’re paying part of that thing, then they also get covered. Because, frankly, I don’t want them contributing disease problems and health issues to the rest of the…

COOPER: Let’s try to answer the question.

COOPER: Would your plan, Governor Richardson, cover undocumented workers?

RICHARDSON: Yes, it would. It should cover everybody. (APPLAUSE) In this country, no matter who you are, whether you’re a ditch- digger, you’re a teacher, you’re a CEO, you’re a waiter, you’re a maid, every American deserves the right to the best possible quality health care.