A while back, (before the election) blogger Udolpho correctly predicted the Republican Party’s defeat in the recent elections, and wrote that, among other failures, Bush’s “pandering to Mexicans hasn’t made them hate America any less–if anything they hate us more because they are contemptuous of our weakness.*”

The footnote that goes with that asterisk is these extremely interesting tables:

* Note these tables from Zogby — they speak volumes:

On Mexicans:	Hard Working	Honest	Law Abiding	Tolerant	Racist
How The U.S. Sees Mexicans	78%	42%	34%	44%	18%
How Mexicans See Mexicans	76%	49%	39%	45%	17%

On Americans:	Hard Working	Honest	Law Abiding	Tolerant	Racist
How The U.S. Sees Americans	56%	41%	46%	36%	35%
How Mexicans See Americans	26%	16%	40%	17%	73%

Good luck on assimilation.

Yes, good luck! And of course, those Americans who think that Mexicans aren’t racist, by American standards, and even by the somewhat relaxed standards of VDARE.com, are wrong–Mexican attitudes in racial matters are extremely retrograde.

Those unamused by Harris-Teeter’s cowardly suppression of Christmas (operating mainly in the South, it faces less risk than most chain store businesses) - discussed by Peter Brimelow in today’s lead article - might like to discuss the matter with the company’s President Fred J.Morganthall, as well as with their arrogant PR flack Jennifer Panetta

Instapundit linked to this video with this remark:

November 29, 2006

MORE RACIST REMARKS captured by YouTube.

Don’t know if he realizes that the story, a Professor who wants to exterminate white people, is over a year old. Michelle Malkin had the whole story back then.

Watch it, if you like:

And check out the details on Wikipedia, and his call to exterminate white people:

“Now how do I know that the white people know that we are going to come up with a solution to the problem. I know it because they have retina scans, they have what they call racial profiling, DNA banks, and they’re monitoring our people to try to prevent the one person from coming up with the one idea. And the one idea is, how we are going to exterminate white people because that in my estimation is the only conclusion I have come to. We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem.”

Plus his statement that he published after the incident, in PDF. which says, in part, that

I speak for no one, EXCEPT for all the Ancient Afrikans of Kemet- the original name that was changed by the greeks to Egypt- who were invaded and murdered in mass numbers, over the course of centuries by: the hyksos, the assyrians, the libyans, the persians, the turks, the greeks, the romans, the spanish, the portuguese, the french, the british and the arabs-all of whom desecrated and pillaged Kemetic Temples, Royal tombs, and robbed from these Afrikan sanctuaries priceless artifacts and sacred texts that now sit in european museums, “prestigious” university basements, and the private homes of the rich throughout the world.

He continues to “speak for no one, EXCEPT” a lot of people–mostly imaginary. This is an actual Professor, of sorts, although he seems to be retired, and owning a bookstore in North Carolina.

The Lou Barletta 60 Minutes Video discussed by Donald A. Collins on November 28 is available in its entirety on YouTube. Part One below, Part Two here.

I’ve heard Lou Barletta speak in person, and he’s good. By the way, although we’ve spelled it a couple of different ways here on the site, the official spelling for Barletta’s town is Hazleton, Pennsylvania.

Justin Goodman was killed in a hit-and-run accident by an illegal alien with numerous prior arrests who had never been deported. Goodman was riding his motorcycle in Thornton, Colorado, when he was struck down July 1, 2004, and left to die by a career criminal, Roberto Martinez-Ruiz, whose activities should have gotten him a one-way ticket home years earlier — but didn’t.

Now an investigation has revealed that the illegal alien family of the killer used US government programs to purchase homes fraudulently [Justin Goodman's Family Says He Would Be Alive If Not For Loans, The Denver Channel 11/29/06] .

7NEWS’ investigation has found that the immigrant family used phony documents, and in apparent collusion with realtors and lenders, received fraudulent loans to buy two homes in Thornton which were backed by F.H.A. loans.

“My nephew would definitely have been alive today if they hadn’t made those loans,” said Vizzi.

For more on the rotten banking industry, see former finance professional Joe Guzzardi’s report about how the business has become corrupted: Mortgages For Illegal Aliens: Are Banks The Treason Industry?

It’s a bitter experience for victims’ families to learn on top of a terrible tragedy that both the government and trusted private institutions have colluded in the destruction of our system of laws out of greed.

I love, love, love these stories! Let me say that again–I LOVE THESE STORIES!!

The stories about people who come to America LEGALLY so they can go to school, work hard and raise kids…oh, and they do it on their own nickel not yours.

And more than anything else they appreciate the opportunity and love America–not umm, Mexico.[Legal immigrants to U.S. face green card logjam By Tim Gaynor AP News 11/29/06]

This wonderful article talks about a man (and his family) who emigrated from India nine years ago. His green card is being held up because the immigration and customs people are overloaded with work thaks to the 12-20 million illegal aliens they’re dealing with.

Sanjay Mehta is just a tad frustrated with the preferential treatment given to those who come here illegally.

“Washington has taken notice of them … But what about the plight of legal immigrants to this country? We seem to have been forgotten.”

VDARE.com has been talking about these people for years! People like Peter Brimelow who follow the rules on the path to American citizenship–not those who cheat the system and wait for an amnesty deal.

These immigrants, according to the same AP article, “are highly skilled, with science, electrical engineering and medical degrees, and are hired by U.S. companies, universities and research laboratories under a strict visa system with an annual cap of 65,000.”

If they make it to the States, they wait for an average of 12 years for a Green Card.

Another legal immigrant, Kola Akinwande from Nigeria, says his wife has a masters in child psychology but is not allowed to work in the United States–she is here on her husband’s visa, of course.

Even worse, as angry as that makes me listen to this:

“I also have to pay out-of-state tuition fees for my son to study at university here, which puts an additional financial burden on the family,” he added.

Don’t you just want to throw something? How pathetic!

Come here illegally and you will find yourself entitled to more benfits, freebies and get-out-of-jail-free-cards that you can possibly imagine.

Come here legally and you will get the shaft.

America: The land of opportunity…well, for lawbreakers anyway.

Via the SPLC’s Hatewatch, [Children's book compares immigrants to weeds] I see a story about a Judge in Brooklyn who has self published a book which is a metaphor for uncontrolled immigration:

A Brooklyn judge is courting controversy with a new illustrated children’s book that some critics are calling a thinly veiled anti-immigration screed.

Criminal Court Judge John Wilson’s “Hot House Flowers” warns of “effects of unregulated immigration” in a plot line about beautiful flowers that wither when dandelions sneak into their greenhouse.

“It’s intended to describe defense of home and defense of country, and the reasons for that defense,” said Wilson, who self-published the book, listed on Amazon.com at $15.99.

The story tells of jealous weeds that hog all the water and soil in the greenhouse. The other flowers suffer, but don’t do anything until it’s almost too late - because they don’t want to appear intolerant.

Judge is in immig groups’ bad books, By Adam Lisberg, New York Daily News

The Daily News asked immigrant rights groups to comment on this children’s book, and found them

“outraged by the book - and even more upset that its author sits on the bench

“It’s a shame that someone would write a children’s book that teaches intolerance and hatred of immigrants,” said Norman Eng, spokesman for the New York Immigration Coalition.

Margaret Fung, [send her mail] executive director of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said Wilson was dehumanizing immigrants by talking about “weeds” and “invaders.”

“I would hate to be an immigrant in his courtroom,” Fung said.

Wilson handles night arraignments in Brooklyn, where he said he sometimes takes a defendant’s immigration status into account when setting bail.

“While that’s a factor, it’s not the overriding factor,” Wilson said. “It’s got to be a factor - if a person’s an illegal immigrant, how likely is it that he’s going to come back to court?”

Here’s a simple point: judges are supposed to be anti-crime. That doesn’t mean that they are supposed to always believe the police and the prosecutor, but they’re supposed to be for law and against crime. If these guys think that Wilson shouldn’t be allowed to sit on the bench because he’s opposed to illegal immigration, then that’s just wrong. By the way, Christmas is coming–if you buy Hot House Flowers through VDARE.com we get a small cut.

What other publication besides the New York Times could write about black flight from Los Angeles and not use the word “immigration” a single time? Reasons for the Dawson family’s exodus are only hinted — the increased violence, a murdered son whose killer was never caught, and “black families are moving out and Latinos are moving in.” You have to read deep into the article to see how completely Watts has changed [Watts Changes, and a Mainstay Bids It Farewell, New York Times 11/28/06].

Parents seem to feel more pressure to work longer hours and more jobs these days. And some of the newer, Latino parents favor soccer — not one of the club’s sports — and do not speak enough English to converse with Mr. Dawson and the other coaches, who are mostly black. According to Census data, the population of Watts in 1970 was 90 percent black and 8 percent Latino; in 2000, it was 38 percent black and 61 percent Latino.

The Times did get one thing right: the story’s subject, James Dawson, is indeed a “mainstay,” whose neighborly volunteer coaching of kids’ baseball adds greatly to the community’s social glue, a quality that we have learned to value more as we lose it. As a coach to pre-teen boys at the local playground, he teaches fairness and good sportsmanship as well as hitting and fielding. His neighbors hated to see him leave.

The Dawsons have moved to safer suburban Lancaster, but James Dawson still drives to Watts three times a week during baseball season to continue coaching, at least for now.

Recently Steve Sailer decried raising the minimum wage as over 80% of all Americans are inclined to do:

Say a business employs two workers at $5.15 an hour. The minimum wage goes up to $7.25 per hour, so the owner gives the smarter worker a $2.10 raise and lays off the dumber one. The smarter guy might remember to vote for his Congressman in gratitude. But is the guy who got fired because he wasn’t worth the new minimum wage (remember, he probably didn’t major in econ at the U. of Chicago) going to understand he’s out on the street because Congress lifted the minimum?

Now, as someone that did major in Economics at the U of Chicago, I feel I need to explain a few things. There is considerable debate among economists about the relative extent to which raising the minimum wage tends to cause unemployment-and the extent to which it raises the wages of other workers. Generally the unemployment effect is confined to a fairly small group of workers-including those that are young and less capable–and thus less likely to vote. That is part of why raising the minimum wage makes so much political sense. Young, poor workers are less likely to vote than older, less poor folks. Now, the minimum wage also has strange geographic effects. Raising the national minimum wage may affect a poorer state significantly-but have less direct impact in a high rent district, except to the extent it discourages folks for leaving it by removing opportunities to move to lower rent states and still earn a living.

That said, I am ill disposed to oppose a policy supported by over 80% of all Americans. However, I’m well aware of the potential problems with the minimum wage. I agree there are really limits to the extent the minimum wage raised without having serious side effects. Raising the minimum wage alone can’t achieve the same degree of income equality in the US as we see in highly developed, low immigration countries like Japan. I tend to think the Fed was correct when they suggested raising the Earned Income Tax Credit as a less disruptive alternative to raising the minimum wage. The EITC has some advantages because it can specifically targets families in need. I’d personally like to see the minimum wage and EITC both indexed to inflation–and the decision which to increase in a given year could be made according to how high the official unemployment rate was that year. I’d fund the EITC specifically by a tax on concentrated assets like Ralph Nader has proposed on estates over $5 Million (maybe one put in place as a replacement for the existing inheritance tax). If the unemployment rate were higher than say 3%, we’d increase the EITC that year instead of the minimum wage. The penalties for violation of the federal minimum wage laws could also be significantly increased. This would also sidestep the whole debate about the level at which increasing the minimum wage causes unemployment.

Now there is a fundamental problem with the EITC(sometimes classed as a Basic Income Guarantee). A means of income support like the EITC isn’t really appropriate for non-citizens(and this would become more apparent if we raised it significantly). I’m not terribly fond of the presence of guest workers in the US or the practice of mass immigration. However at present these are facts of life-and we need to consider how to best minimize their negative impact on US citizens. Also, I think the non-citizens in the US need a fundamentally different compensation and regulatory package than US citizens. For example, I think non-citizens should be presented with tickets home and a resettlement allowance upon demand(provided at employer expense). Also, non-citizens really need subsidized legal services, since as a group they are far less experience with the US legal system(this might be funded by increased legal fees). I would also suggest that non-citizen workers and the American public might benefit by significantly increasing the minimum wage for non-citizens-say to something like double that of US citizens. A portion of that increase in wages might be set aside in a fund to be given to the non-citizen upon repatriation, used for fines committed by a non-citizen, used to fund mandatory health care insurance or surrendered upon attaining citizenship with all its benefits. Raising the minimum wage for non-citizens would mean that fewer non-citizens would work low end jobs or those requiring training. It would have little impact on the migration of moderately skilled workers to the US. The minimum wage is a simple law that a lot of folks understand. It would rapidly become understood that folks paying less than twice the minimum wage had better hire workers for low end jobs with clear proof of not only legal residency, but of citizenship. It would also make it far less likely that US citizens would be pushed entirely out of the employment market by immigration policy. Also raising the minimum wage for non-citizens would ensure the job hunters the US attracts are those far less likely to wind up on public assistance than we presently see. We’d see a lot of employers more subject to minimum wage violations-specifically those employing non-citizens. Raising the minimum wage for non-citizens high enough would have serious side effects-side-effects that would be potentially beneficial to American citizens.

This proposal isn’t a panacea–there are a lot of other policies I think we need to solve the immigration crisis. How would Democrats like Nancy Pelosi respond to this kind of proposal–particularly if it were supported by the Immigration Reform Caucus? These Liberal Democrats have already positioned themselves as saying that increasing the minimum wage is a good thing-and they have broad public support. I fully expect that non-citizens would as a group support raising their own minimum wage even though it would mean less new immigration than we might see otherwise–and might mean some of their own numbers would be forced home by increased unemployment. Why? Because those lucky enough to remain would make more money and as long as those making more outnumbered those forced out there would be natural-and growing-base of support. Could folks like Nancy Pelosi really oppose them? If she did, she’d probably come off like a self-serving millionaire vineyard owner.

Around here I don’t hear the Tammy Bruce show – and she seems a rather unusual sort of woman – but she has a vice-like grip on the cheap labor lobby scam. Denouncing a recent “Poor Orchard owner losing his crop” story she says

1) He didn’t want to pay Americans a higher wage than he pays the Mexicans or 2) He wanted his crop to die so he’d have a dramatic story to tell and which an American television network could feature about how mean and awful having a secure border really is, because he doesn’t want to pay Americans a higher wage.

And goes on to make a number of biting suggestions. Read it in full: such a perfectly distilled dose of vitriol is difficult to abstract. VDARE.com appreciates the graceful citing of Steve Sailer’s piece on Pearanoia.