As James Fulford noted, after much fanfare the New York Daily News finally posted a correction of the falsehoods in their smear of me.

Initially the piece by Dolores Prida (email her) claimed.

“Driving immigrants out and sealing the border are the best arguments to win future elections among the “more important” white voters, according to a report issued by the group American Cause and authored by Marcus Epstein.

These “more important” voters get, in large numbers, their world view from conservative talk radio and Internet publications, where hate-mongering thrives, unchecked and unchallenged.

Taking the terms “white vote” out of context deceptive, but changing it to “white voters” is completely false. Furthermore, nowhere in my report do I actually discuss “white voters,” “white votes” or anything to do with electoral politics. They got this bright idea from the press release that stated:

In addition to discussing this study, panelists will argue

* Despite years of pandering, the GOP never won the Hispanic Vote;and past success was overstated
* More Hispanic voters oppose amnesty and support border controlthan vote for pro-amnesty candidates like John McCain
* Immigration is not a major factor for Hispanic voters
* Whatever gains, if any, pandering to Hispanics gives is greatly
outweighed by loss of the White Vote, which is more important.
* The Demographic changes made by mass immigration have been disastrous to Republicans and fatal if not halted.
* Support for border security, national sovereignty, and immigration control rallies the GOP and brings Reagan Democrats back into the GOP

The “in addition to this study” prepositional phrase should be a pretty clear sign that these statement are not in the study.

Below is my letter to the editor, which will most likely not get printed.

Dolores Prida’s column, “Assimilate This” attacks me because my report “Immigration and the 2008 Republican Defeat” supposedly claimed that white voters are “more important.” This is simply untrue. My report does not even cover voters, it discusses the views of candidates. The word ‘important’ does not even appear in the report, nor does the word “white” except when it is someone’s last name. When I have written ethnic voting patters in the past, I stated, “a white vote is just as important as a Hispanic vote.”

After spending much of her column attacking me for something I didn’t write, she then says I am guilty of “ignorant speech” if not “hate speech” for failing to “assimilate” that “There’s no one American ‘dominant’ culture. There never has been.”

This would be news to our Founders.

In the Federalist Papers #2 “Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence” John Jay wrote, “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs…”

Ms. Prida is entitled to her views on immigration and assimilation. In the future, though, I suggest she reads what I’ve written before she attacks me, and learn a little American History before telling me what our country “never has been.”

Megan McArdle writes in the Atlantic:

Arnold Kling compares the Obama and Bush administrations to gangs of thugs raiding his home.  James Wolcott accuses him of racism.[Libertarians better shut up for the next four years]

Kling isn’t a racist, he’s a weird transnational libertarian, who has a strange way of describing people who care more about the harm immigration does to America’s poor than they do about the gains achieved by Mexico’s poor in America–he calls them, in careful lower case letters, “national socialists.”

Now, of course, we have a black president, and James Wolcott stands ready to police any reference to him for signs of racism.  This is a charge so serious that it shuts down any possible discourse, and is thus much loved by people who do not care to be disagreed with. Would it be racist of me to note that Mr. Wolcott’s accusations seem vaguely redolent of the tactics of one Senator Joseph McCarthy?

No, of course it wouldn’t, because Wolcott and McCarthy were both white. It’s when you accuse Obama of behaving like Robert Mugabe, or Jesse Jackson, or Adam Clayton Powell that you’d be a racist.

Anyhow, here’s Wolcott:

“And there the matter might have rested had not Kling surrendered to heat of candor today at a Heritage Foundation/Club for Growth confab and decried, “Barack Obama is destroying my daughter’s future. It is like sitting there watching my house ransacked by a gang of thugs.”

Now if Kling can’t comprehend the implication of racial menace encoded in daughter-gang-thugs/home invasion…[Et cetera]

I’m tempted to say something like “Kudos to Wolcott for admitting that when a gang of thugs attacks your house and your daughter, they’re usually minorities,” but he probably thinks it’s a stereotype. As far as I know, the libertarian Arnold Kling was thinking of a SWAT team raid by government forces, i.e.  largely white thugs. But even before the election, I wrote “Face It, Anything You Say About Obama Is A Gaffe,”

To expand up Joe Guzzardi’s coinage “hate facts,” now we see that the Prime Minister of Britain is on verge of an aneurysm in his rage over the publication in easily-comprehensible form of a few statistics about immigration. From The Times of London:

Statistics chief Karen Dunnell inflames row over foreign workers
ONS highlights figures on jobs for immigrants for the first time

by Sam Coates, Richard Ford and David Brown

Graphic: imported labour

The UK’s official statistician weighed into the debate about foreign workers yesterday by highlighting the growing numbers of immigrants getting jobs while the British workforce declines.

On the day that figures showed the number of people unemployed at a 12-year high, the Office for National Statistics chose to reveal that the number of foreign workers increased by 175,000 to 2.4 million last year while the number of British workers fell by 234,000 to 27 million.

Karen Dunnell, the National Statistician, sought to focus public attention on the contrasting fortunes of foreign and British workers as the country slipped into recession. Her intervention came as construction workers took part in wildcat strikes at power stations in Nottinghamshire and Kent, angry about jobs going to foreigners.

The ONS, which is charged with collecting data and providing impartial analysis, said that it made the unprecedented release because of the “topicality of the issue”.

Whitehall sources told The Times that ministers were “fizzing” with anger, accusing the ONS of a political act designed to embarrass Gordon Brown over his “British jobs for British workers” soundbite.

MPs warned that the statistics were open to misinterpretation and risked inflaming tensions in many British workplaces.

(more…)

An interesting correction to Dolores Prida’s column Assimilate this.

“CORRECTION: An earlier version of this column incorrectly quoted a report by Marcus Epstein of American Cause saying that white voters are “more important” than Hispanic voters. Those comments were not in the report and were not said by Epstein. The Daily News regrets the error.”

Really, this is too bad of her. Anything between quotation marks should be word for word what the subject said, not what you think they meant.

And even we rabid nativists know that “everybody’s equal in the voting booth.”

We don’t claim that white voters are more important, we claim that they’re more numerous.

Scott McConnell writes in the American Conservative’s blog:

One of the sharpest arguments in favor of immigration restriction was made, I believe, by Peter Brimelow in his book Alien Nation. My recollection is that it was more an aside in the introduction than a developed argument, (which if correct would be a shame), but the essence of it was the multiculturalism would inhibit and eventually render impossible a fully free society.

We’ve seen plenty of evidence of Europe’s myriad difficulties reconciling multiculturalism and freedom of speech– from the vociferous reaction to publication of Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses, to the Danish cartoon controversy, with many stops along along the way and more surely to come. I had assumed that America, with its vigorous First Amendment culture, would be much more resistant to the temptation to restrain speech.

I believe he’s thinking of this passage:

“Immigrants do the dirty jobs no one else will touch.” Americans
are told, equally incessantly. I don’t agree with this economic analysis
either. But in this book, I act as if it were true. In discussing the many
aspects of immigration policy, I inevitably touch on some issues of race and
ethnicity that in American debate nowadays are usually taboo.

Taboos, however, are not just a matter of cowardice and mendacity. They
also reflect a sincere human reluctance to give offense (which is why they tend
to become rampant in diverse societies).[Emphasis added][Alien Nation, 1995, p. xvii (PDF)]

Scott goes on to criticize the Daily News’s Dolores Frida, [Send her mail] who, as Peter Brimelow noted below, doesn’t believe in free speech for Marcus Epstein and VDARE.com, asking, finally “So, a question for Ms. Frida: what alterations in the US Constitution does she recommend as the “fair, safe, middle ground” to deal with such threats as Marcus Epstein?”

The good news is that Austin is thinking about what to do if Mexico goes kablooey. The bad news is a posture of submission to invasion rather than border control.

[Texas Homeland Security Director Steve] McCraw, a Perry appointee, was unavailable to comment for this story, but Cesinger said the plan was in early stages. It now deals with only law enforcement concerns, she said, and not any potential crush of humanitarian needs the state might face if thousands of refugees flood across the border. “That might be something that comes into consideration as it’s developed,” Cesinger said.

Destabilization in Mexico might be only a remote possibility, but lawmakers said preparing for any potential disaster is prudent.

State Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, said Texas should plan to deal with not only security concerns but also basic needs refugees would have for housing, health care and food. [Texas crafts plan for Mexico collapse, El Paso TimesFebruary 11, 2009]

Meeting millions of Mexican escapees with picnic baskets is a PLAN? How about reinforcing the fence and sending them back home? The proper response would be border enforcement, not welcome.

Washington has NEVER sent a group of refugees or Temporary Protected Status foreigners home. A Mexico meltdown would be just another illegal immigration portal.