02/04/2009
Having published The Nativists Are Restless, Continued By The Editorial Board February 2, 2009, 6:20 pm “The Board”, The New York Times Editorial Writers’ blog shut down the comment thread ninety minutes later, — having posted seven.It is clear why. Almost a day later (I was watching) they have posted 102 (!) more. Overwhelmingly these are hostile to the NYT, with many displaying a sound grasp of Vdare.com arguments and some actually citing VDARE. There are, indeed, a solid core of rabid pro open borders types, often displaying crude ethnic aminus. But what was particularly interesting was the number of left/immigrant deviationists
1. 27. February 2, 2009 9:48 pm Link I’m an Arab-American, a labor Democrat who opposes illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens. My brother, a blue collar worker and Democrat, married to a native born Hispanic woman, also opposes it. Are we “nativists”? Yes, in the best sense. We believe, as Barbara Jordan did, that immigration policy should be for the benefit of the AMERICAN worker and citizens — not immigrants, not employers, not special interests that benefit from ignoring our laws.1. 32. February 2, 2009 10:14 pm Link I am a black man, a union member, voted for Obama, and I am against legal and illegal immigration. It’s killing our wages and there are already too many people here!!! Shameful articles like this one make me question the real motives of the NY Times.
1. 47. February 2, 2009 11:41 pm Link Classic example of why I stopped purchasing the NY Times long ago, and will never do so again. I am a minority, not a “white male racist,” and DO NOT support yours or the Pew Hispanic Center of any of the other cheap votes/amnesty pushing organizations… For decades during the mid-20th century, the US had little legal and illegal immigration, and lo and behold, the middle class’ real wages rose. The laws of the market are simple, reduced labor pool = higher wages.
1. 80. February 3, 2009 10:45 am Link You don’t seem to realize that the movement against mass immigration and amnesty spans the political spectrum. I’m a liberal Democrat. I oppose mass immigration for the kinds of reasons Nicholas Kristof stated in his column of April 9, 2006, and because your amnesty combined with policies such as chain migration will add another 110 million to the US population over the next 40 years on top of 30 million in native increase (figures derived from a 2008 Pew Research Study which I think you missed). This would be environmentally disastrous for the US and for the planet …
1. 96. February 3, 2009 12:46 pm Link The first question that one has to ask is, why are all these people leaving their own countries. Because their own countries are a total mess. The next question is, who make these countries a total mess? The answer is, citizens who have no dicipline nor respect for the law. When things get so bad in their own country they move to the US and begin exactly where they left off at home. I need to ask what’s so great about that? If you are in the US illegally isn’t that breaking the law? Now explain to me the purpose of having laws if it’s ok for everyone to break them. – Brown Skin Girl
In fairness to the NYT, at present they are featuring as "Comment of the Moment" a remark I thought of noting here, but did not for space reasons:
The addiction to cheap labor must come to an end. It’s an unmitigated evil that undercuts the very foundations of that 'American dream' that the huddled masses come in search of.
— Cloriato (#97 link)
Not just the Nativists are restless!
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.