No Racists Here

Mickey Kaus' rejection of John McCain's effort to make nice on immigration is fascinating:

McCain said he had "respect" for opponents of his immigration plan (which he didn't renounce) "for I know that the vast majority of critics to the bill based their opposition in a principled defense of the rule of law." Not like those others who base their opposition on bigoted yahoo nativism! McCain's semi-conciliatory words aren't what you say when you really respect your opposition--then you say "I know we have honest disagreements." Not "I know most of you aren't really racists." Even his suckup betrayed how he really feels. Which I suspect is sneering contempt!

So he's holding out for McCain to make the extremely implausible claim that there's not a single bigoted yahoo in the anti-immigration movement? I thought Mickey schtick used to be that just because all his favorite causes are also the favorite cause of racists didn't necessarily mean people who agreed with him are racists. Now I guess it's all-or-nothing; either you think there's no racism in the United States, or else he's got no time for you. Weird.

Comments

That's "Republican blogger Mickey Kaus" on first reference, Matt.

Posted by Jeff Larson | February 11, 2008 2:51 PM

Kaus's value as a blogger is somewhere in line with The Ace of Spades. By which I mean, nil.

Posted by Freddie | February 11, 2008 2:57 PM

"Paranoid racist blogger Mickey Kaus" would be better, Jeff. Kaus has been hyperventilating for years at the suggestion that anyone might think that a monomaniacal obsession with anti-immigration paranoia, the repeal of affirmative action, and the destruction of welfare might be in any way related to racism. All the while, Kaus spends his time going on about the Aztlan conspiracy to take over the southwest and the intrinsic narcissism of gay men. But you know, he's not a bigot or anything.

Posted by Christmas | February 11, 2008 2:59 PM

I thought Mickey schtick used to be that just because all his favorite causes are also the favorite cause of racists didn't necessarily mean people who agreed with him are racists. Now I guess it's all-or-nothing; either you think there's no racism in the United States, or else he's got no time for you.

Probably because he's trying to draw ever more fine distinctions between the good* ("Mexicans will bring their gutter culture here and ruin our country") and the bad ("Mexicans are a gutter people and will ruin our country") sorts of arguments to which he finds himself drawn.

* My presumption about his conception of "good," and I certainly wouldn't want to bet much that he thinks the latter statement is bad.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | February 11, 2008 3:00 PM

Still amazes me that Slate continues to publish Kaus. At least Hitchens' over-the-top writing is interesting to read. Kaus' greatest acheivement is the fusion of obnoxious and dull.

Posted by Jim | February 11, 2008 3:02 PM

I think The Atlantic needs to conduct an intervention, or at least block certain emails from getting to MattY. Look up the real meaning of GuiltByAssociation for starters.

Since MattY hyped Obama's "blueprint" in a previous post, perhaps he'd like to consider how Obama would respond if someone went to his public appearances and helped him crunch some numbers on immigration "reform". I don't think Obama would come out looking too good after such an exchange.

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 3:02 PM

And all this time I thought that Kaus's signature policy issue was universal health care.

Posted by Thomas | February 11, 2008 3:08 PM

Regarding the Aztlan comment, there doesn't have to be a conspiracy for something similar to come about.

Perhaps we could have a grown-up discussion about Mexico's claims - still a part of their national mindset and even taught in schools - and their various statements and actions. Like how they've claimed parts of our population as their own, how they give free schoolbooks teaching their history to U.S. public schools, their very active consuls who push their agenda even at city council meetings, their links to Democratic politicians, their links to U.S. non-profits (which they've admitted they're going to use to push their agenda inside the U.S.), and more. All of that leads to some form of power sharing, and might lead to a de facto arrangement of some kind.

Of course, we aren't going to have a grown-up discussion about that here.

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 3:19 PM

Worst. Blogger. Evah.

Posted by BryklynLibrul | February 11, 2008 3:21 PM

Regarding the Aztlan comment, there doesn't have to be a conspiracy for something similar to come about.

Though it helps if you're a paranoid conspiracy theorist.

I think Whack O'Mole needs an intervention, because he's obviously decided not to crawl out from under his bed until the ImminentDanger of TheBrownInsurgency is over. See here for more. I don't think Whack O'Mole would look good after six years under the bed.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | February 11, 2008 3:27 PM

TLB:

I live in Southern California. I don't know where you live.

I am immersed in Hispanic culture. It's everywhere around here. You really need to be bilingual to fully function here.

I know plenty of Hispanics including first generation immigrants.

There is no plot and no desire to reverse the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. None. Not an ounce of it. There's just a bunch of people who came from a relatively poorer country to a relatively richer one to work and build a better life. That's it.

Look, I know I am not going to convince you of any of this. There is just a group of Americans who are really scared of all this Hispanic immigration, for all sorts of reasons. But I assure you, the Aztlan rhetoric is just that, rhetoric. Some musings by a few intellectuals with too much free time on their hands who think Mexico got a raw deal 150 years ago. Take some anti-anxiety medications, sign up for a Spanish class, and callllllllllm yourself. It will all be OK, I promise.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 11, 2008 3:31 PM

Stuff we got by pursuing "Manifest Destiny" is aces. We stole it a long time ago so it's ours now. Come get it and we'll manifest a little more destiny on yo' asses.

So, stay home. Or not. Just away from here.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | February 11, 2008 3:32 PM

anti-immigration paranoia, the repeal of affirmative action, and the destruction of welfare might be in any way related to racism

While racists may hold the last two views (racist groups also generally oppose the war in Iraq), most of the arguments for them have very little to do with racism. It's not racist to be angry about being passed over for employment in favor of a less-qualified applicant simply due to the color of your own skin. In fact, that concept is racism itself. And non-medicaid, non-foodstamp welfare has the effect of instituting (or at least, exacerbating) state-dependent serfdom in the African American community--much like the War on Drugs has forced elements of black market criminality (such as gangs) into African American neighborhoods: elements that didn't exist before the War on Drugs and would likely cease if prohibition ended. Both instances are examples of state interference in the development of healthy regional economies.

As far as immigration is concerned, "rule of law" and "border security" arguments are compelling and accurate, but I have a hard time believing people like Kaus would be so worked up if illegal immigrants all looked like Maria Sharapova. In fact, I'm quite sure they'd be stealing the libertarian argument for zero border control.

Posted by Shinyk | February 11, 2008 3:35 PM

It's a mistake to dismiss Kaus as simply a racist. He hates homosexuals, too.

Posted by MoeLarryAndJesus | February 11, 2008 3:43 PM

Racist groups generally oppose the war in Iraq if and only if you don't count racism against Arabs & Muslims.

Posted by Kalkin | February 11, 2008 3:45 PM

Except that ... Kaus is right about McCain. McCain's statement is just another of his standard sanctimonious self-righteous quasi-acknowledgments that people who disagree with him also have a point of view, but really truly he knows he's right. Soon it'll that most of the people who don't want to be in Iraq for 100 years still want to defend America.

Posted by P O'Neill | February 11, 2008 3:48 PM

Dilan Esper: I live in L.A. also. As for my comment, let me suggest printing it out and then asking "smart friends" to help you understand it. If you were capable of understanding what I wrote above, you wouldn't have written your comment.

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 3:57 PM

"I have a hard time believing people like Kaus would be so worked up if illegal immigrants all looked like Maria Sharapova."

There are illegal immigrants who look like Maria Sharapova -- Eastern European women who have overstayed their travel visas and are working here illegally. They may not be depressing the wages of unskilled African Americans like Mexican immigrants are (since they aren't competing for the same jobs), but our immigration laws ought to apply to them as well.

Posted by Fred | February 11, 2008 3:58 PM

It always surprises me to see Kaus get overtly racist. Considering how he struggled all his adult life dealing with the widespread prejudice against capriphiliacs, you'd think he'd know better . . .

Posted by rea | February 11, 2008 4:01 PM

Dilan Esper: I live in L.A. also.

I suspect that Dilan Esper is not afraid to go outside.

If you were capable of understanding what I wrote above, you wouldn't have written your comment.

Oh, hilarious.

Whack O'Mole's perpetual blogwhoring mission is designed to funnel people to his piece o'shit site to see what the fuck he's talking about -- here's a hint: his white supremacist commenters seem to think they know, and he's not disabusing them. But it's all dog-whistle: he thinks TheBrownMenace is going to rise up and take over RealSoonNow, but he's too much of a chickenshit to say it here, because he'd be laughed out of the park.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | February 11, 2008 4:09 PM

There are illegal immigrants who look like Maria Sharapova -- Eastern European women who have overstayed their travel visas and are working here illegally. They may not be depressing the wages of unskilled African Americans like Mexican immigrants are (since they aren't competing for the same jobs), but our immigration laws ought to apply to them as well.

I know. Resort towns in particular are blanketed with Russians, Romanians, Poles, Bulgarians, Ukranians, Belarusians, Slovaks, etc. Most of whom are women and many of whom are attractive. And yes, immigration law should apply to them.

I'm simply supposing that you would never hear "rule of law" or "wage depression" arguments from Kaus or others if there were 12 million illegal Eastern-European women in the US and zero Mexicans, irrespective of whether or not those arguments are fundamentally correct. It just wouldn't have come up.

Posted by Shinyk | February 11, 2008 4:22 PM

Smug elitists who imagine that concern about immigration is only due to racist hysteria are deluded, as on other issues, by the exaggerated sense of their own wonderfulness.

The current non-system degrades wages and social services for our already under-served poor and working class citizens while cruelly exploiting illiterate compesinos, often for the benefit of large, profitable corporations. You'd think this would be a natural issue for Democrats.

Posted by Robert Powell | February 11, 2008 4:25 PM

"I'm simply supposing that you would never hear "rule of law" or "wage depression" arguments from Kaus or others if there were 12 million illegal Eastern-European women in the US and zero Mexicans, irrespective of whether or not those arguments are fundamentally correct. It just wouldn't have come up."

Sorry, Shinyk, but there would be plenty of resistance to these illegals if there were 12 million of them here.

"You'd think this would be a natural issue for Democrats."

It would be if Democrats cared more about their current constituents than the prospect of adding tens of millions of new block voters.

Posted by Fred | February 11, 2008 4:34 PM

Kaus is a jerk. Ignore him.

Posted by HyperIon | February 11, 2008 4:51 PM

As for my comment, let me suggest printing it out and then asking "smart friends" to help you understand it. If you were capable of understanding what I wrote above, you wouldn't have written your comment.

You want a "grown-up discussion" of something that isn't worth discussing, TLB. Only paranoid lunatics worry about the plot of the Mexican government to teach the legend of lost Aztlan in its public schools.

Get treatment for your paranoia, and enjoy the pleasures of living in the rich and vibrant Hispanic culture here in Los Angeles. It will only get even more vibrant as time rolls on.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 11, 2008 5:06 PM

TLB: "Perhaps we could have a grown-up discussion about Mexico's claims"

Dilan Esper: "I know plenty of Hispanics including first generation immigrants. There is no plot and no desire to reverse the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. None. Not an ounce of it..... I assure you, the Aztlan rhetoric is just that, rhetoric. Some musings by a few intellectuals with too much free time on their hands"

TLB: "As for my comment, let me suggest printing it out and then asking "smart friends" to help you understand it. If you were capable of understanding what I wrote above, you wouldn't have written your comment."

Ah yes, I can see who's really determined to have a grown-up, respectful discussion around here.

Posted by The Navigator | February 11, 2008 5:20 PM

"Get treatment for your paranoia, and enjoy the pleasures of living in the rich and vibrant Hispanic culture here in Los Angeles. It will only get even more vibrant as time rolls on."

Have you noticed that whenever some writer uses the words "vibrant" or "vibrancy" he is almost guaranteed to be yanking your chain?

Google says that the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com has used "vibrant" 84 times. Here are some examples I gleaned from Google without subjecting myself to actually reading these WSJ opinion pieces:

"...President Bush is determined to keep the dynamism vibrant, and to encourage and empower the poor to take part in it, rather than to suggest they are ..."

To use "keep the dynamism vibrant" and "empower the poor" in one sentence, hoo boy, that's some fancy writin'! (By the way, what kind of "dynamism" is not "vibrant?" "Listless dynamism?" "Lethargic vibrancy?")

"... The Iraq I saw was a society on the move, a vibrant land with a hardy people experiencing the first heady taste of freedom..."

"... and that is to reveal Baghdad as it truly is, a vibrant city, able and ready to welcome the world business community, ..."

So, when your windows rattle in Baghdad, that's not a car bomb or IED going off, that's just the local vibrancy manifesting itself.

Back home in the USA, things are a-quivering, too:

"... The new creative class craves a vibrant nightlife, outdoor sports facilities and neighborhoods vibrant with street ...

"... We have a vibrant Islamic community of emigrants from across the world. ...

"... Like California, New York City can boast a vibrant immigrant community and is a magnet for ..."

Posted by Steve Sailer | February 11, 2008 5:24 PM

Dilan Esper really needs those "smart friends" to help him/her out. As indicated above, there doesn't have to be a conspiracy for something similar to come about.

Once again, all the actions outlined in my second comment, together with more that I could list, are currently leading to some form of power sharing. That includes Democratic elected officials with divided loyalties, such as L.A.'s current mayor congratulating the president of Mexico on his part in blocking a law approved by a majority of Californians.

And, the textbook issue isn't minor: a foreign government is allowed to spread their anti-American POV to children inside the U.S., and many of those children will grow up with that POV. An example of that can be found from a ZogbyPoll conducted of Mexican in Mexico, in which 58% said the U.S. southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.

Anyone who seeks to downplay such issues is a useful idiot, or worse.

There's more on these issues here:
city-journal.org/html/15_4_mexico.html

And, a Stanford history professor discussed these issues in these very pages some years ago:

theatlantic.com/doc/199611/immigration/5 (do a find for 'Quebec')

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 5:25 PM

The huge swathes of the San Fernando Valley populated by Hispanic immigrants are just about the least "vibrant" places in America, unless you are really into graffiti. There's very little social capital.

Crunch the numbers in Robert D. Putnam (Harvard's "Bowling Along" political scientist) on why there's so little trust and social cohesion in LA. Or listen to William Julius Wilson's finding that Mexican immigrants "do not tend to organize outside of kinship."

For details on Putnam's big study of the impact of diversity on trust and social capital, see

http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_01_15/cover.html

Posted by Steve Sailer | February 11, 2008 5:33 PM

I guess I agree that some liberals are using the issue of anti-Mexican bigotry to dismiss the issue and discredit the conservative policy positions. But it seems Kaus is trying to resolve an empirical question (and a pretty easy one)--whether much of the anti-immigrant backlash is motivated by bigotry--by some appeal to civility. McCain must assume my motives are pure; therefore racist hysteria is not a problem we should be concerned about.

Posted by Colatina | February 11, 2008 5:36 PM

Once again, all the actions outlined in my second comment, together with more that I could list, are currently leading to some form of power sharing. That includes Democratic elected officials with divided loyalties, such as L.A.'s current mayor congratulating the president of Mexico on his part in blocking a law approved by a majority of Californians.

This is just unadulterated bigotry. Antonio Villaraigosa has many faults (his sex life comes to mind), but the man is a patriot who has devoted a good portion of his adult life to public service and standing for civil liberties and economic justice. He DOES NOT have "divided loyalties", and your use of that term is reminiscent of anti-Semites who accuse Jews of not being fully American because of their support for Israel.

And, the textbook issue isn't minor: a foreign government is allowed to spread their anti-American POV to children inside the U.S., and many of those children will grow up with that POV. An example of that can be found from a ZogbyPoll conducted of Mexican in Mexico, in which 58% said the U.S. southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.

I bet the percentage of Spaniards who think Gibraltar belongs to Spain is higher than that. I wouldn't, however, expect a war to break out between the UK and Spain anytime soon.

Anyone who seeks to downplay such issues is a useful idiot, or worse.

TLB, just calm down and enjoy Los Angeles. It really is a great place to live, and you will find that living here is much more pleasant if you be a little more optimistic about things.

The huge swathes of the San Fernando Valley populated by Hispanic immigrants are just about the least "vibrant" places in America, unless you are really into graffiti.

Steve, I am from the San Fernando Valley, and I love it there. I love eating delicious pollo a la brasa from Super Pollo on Van Nuys Boulevard. I love being able to go to an Argentine caniceria and purchase imported products from South America. I love the music stores with full Spanish-language sections. I love the swap meets and mom and pop clothing stores where I can get the latest fashions at a big discount. I love going to an event and hearing a mariachi band play.

I really don't know what the heck your problem is. If you don't like Los Angeles, Steve, don't hang out here. Nobody forces you to. But there's plenty of us who think this is paradise, especially with all of its ethnic diversity. For you to reduce that to graffiti just shows you live a very poor life indeed, trying to tear down people you don't know and don't understand.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 11, 2008 6:05 PM

Have you noticed that whenever some writer uses the words "vibrant" or "vibrancy" he is almost guaranteed to be yanking your chain?

Ah, 'vibrant' and 'Steve Sailer', never to meet in a sentence without the word 'not'.

We'll also note that Whack O'Mole remains too chickenshit to say, beyond his usual dogwhistles and dark hints, that he thinks the brown folks are gearing up for an armed struggle. Living in LA -- if you call hiding under a bed in adult diapers 'living' -- is just one way to feed his delusions.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | February 11, 2008 6:12 PM

The huge swathes of the San Fernando Valley populated by Hispanic immigrants are just about the least "vibrant" places in America, unless you are really into graffiti. There's very little social capital.

Whereas the white parts like Chatsworth form the porn capital of the U.S.A.!

Posted by Adam Villani | February 11, 2008 6:58 PM

Anyone who calls TonyVillar a "patriot" has got to be delusional.

First, it's obvious to everyone that most of his loyalties are to himself and himself only.

As for the loyalties that remain, they're obviously divided. He's a former leader of a racial separatist group that, when he was a leader, was awash in support for Aztlan:

tinyurl.com/37docw (FPM)

And, search for Zedillo here:

sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/GOP/DAILY_BRIEFINGS/DB990804.HTM
accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-6674636_ITM

Those are not the actions of a "patriot". Neither is saying "we're here and we're not leaving" to illegal aliens:

youtube.com/watch?v=3jwqQ8DtlPQ

More here:
americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/187-Links.html
americanpatrol.com/villad.html
laprensa-sandiego.org/archieve/may21/zedillo.htm

More on his radical past here:
bruinalumni.com/antonio/antonioindex.html

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 7:19 PM

TLB:

His name hasn't been "Tony Villar" for years. It's Antonio Villaraigosa. I assume you still go around calling Muhammed Ali "Cassius Clay" and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar "Lewis Alcindor", right?

MECHA, the group that he led in COLLEGE, is not a "radical separatist" group. It is a garden variety liberal Hispanic student group, which, back in the late 1960's, during the heat of the left-wing social movements and when Villaraigosa was a boy, issued a statement proclaiming that Aztlan should be reclaimed by Mexico.

He meets with Mexican politicians just like his Republican predecessor, Richard Riordan, and white Democratic predecessor, Jim Hahn, did.

And policy wise, he is doing a great job as a typical American urban liberal mayor.

Stop libeling the man. There's no basis for right wing conspiracy theories here. And, again, chill out and enjoy the sunshine. LA's a great place to live. You just need to be more optimistic. Don't hate, loooooooove.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 11, 2008 7:50 PM

1. The "-aigosa" part of TonyVillar's name is from his ex-wife, the one he left for a newsbabe. I'm going to guess that she wants it back.

2. Meeting with foreign leaders is one thing (and proscribed in some ways in our laws), but TonyVillar went further: thanking a foreign leader for helping to overturn the will of U.S. voters. Those are not the actions of any sort of "patriot", unless we're talking about patriotism to another country.

3. That said, there are elected Democrats who are even more explicit, including one elected Democrat who concurrently serves on an advisory committee to Mexico's president.

4. The reader should review the materials available and the chronology, and then decide whether Dilan Esper is simply a kneejerk apologist for radical, anti-American racial separists or not. In addition to the links above:

bruinalumni.com/antonio/understandingmecha.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEChA
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Plan_Espiritual_de_Aztl%C3%A1n
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_de_Santa_Barbara

Posted by TLB | February 11, 2008 8:25 PM

The "-aigosa" part of TonyVillar's name is from his ex-wife, the one he left for a newsbabe. I'm going to guess that she wants it back.

You are just being mean. If Antonio Villaraigosa announces that he is going back to Villar (and "Tony"), that's one thing. But lots of people keep their married names after their marriages break up. You are just a jerk who refuses to give someone whom you disagree with the basic respect of calling him by his preferred name. It makes you look petty and mean.

Meeting with foreign leaders is one thing (and proscribed in some ways in our laws), but TonyVillar went further: thanking a foreign leader for helping to overturn the will of U.S. voters. Those are not the actions of any sort of "patriot", unless we're talking about patriotism to another country.

The law in question was DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Villaraigosa was preserving, protecting, and defending the United States Constitution from anti-Hispanic bigots. Good for him.

Again, though, TLB, if you really live in Los Angeles, why don't you stop complaining and ENJOY IT. I assure you we are not going to hell. This is a wonderful place to live. If you stop linking to websites that talk about things that MECHA did 40 years ago and that NONE OF ITS ADULT FORMER MEMBERS BELIEVES, ESPOUSES, OR IS ATTEMPTING TO BRING ABOUT, and start enjoying life in Southern California, you might find that life is much more fun.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 11, 2008 9:45 PM

"The law in question was DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL."

Yup, we have a constitutional right to be unpatriotic. I could fly a foreign nation's flag over my home, and every day at noon go up on the roof with a bullhorn to tell everybody how much better that nation was, and how we should all vote to cede control of our government to it's leaders, and there wouldn't be, constitutionally, a thing the government could do about it.

That wouldn't make it patriotic.

Posted by Brett Bellmore | February 11, 2008 10:04 PM

Well, I grew up in Los Angeles (though I haven't lived there for many years), and still follow it pretty closely by reading the LAT every day.

Overall, my strong impression is that Tony V. is the best Mayor LA has had in decades at least. Hahn seemed pretty much of an empty suit, Riordan was a nice guy but (I suspect) half-senile or something, and the same was certainly true of the later years of the Bradley Administration.

It's pretty silly to regard Tony V. as a "radical" or anything, though Hahn's consultants certainly succeeded in promoting that image when they beat him in 2001. V's proposed semi-takeover of the LAUSD school system was a stupid idea, but stupid in a fairly mundane, ordinary sort of way.

It's too bad that his affair with that newscaster and the angry divorce that followed was such a huge political blow to his support among the older Eastside Latinos, or he'd be the strong frontrunner for Governor in 2010, and probably would make a good one.

But by today's DC standards, his "sex scandal" was absurdly tame. He had an affair with a *woman*...an *adult* woman...an *unmarried* adult woman. That sort of reputation would surely get you disinvited from all of Mark Foley's Republican Caucus orgies.

But I did hear all those jokes that V's scorned wife wanted her half of his name back...

Posted by RKU | February 11, 2008 10:07 PM

It's good to see that both of TonyVillar's fans came by, but I'll point out that RKU isn't discussing everything involved in the scandal.

As for Dilan Esper's comment, it's misleading to state that Prop187 was "DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL." That's what a district court said about most of it (tinyurl.com/2puu22). However, the state could have appealed. Following a long process, they just let it die. It was never taken to a higher level.

And, whatever TonyVillar's motivations, he should not have done it by collaborating with a foreign power.

And, now, I'm going to deliver the coup de grace. Up above, you can see Dilan Esper defending MEChA. Well, guess what: a few years ago, TonyVillar himself somewhat renounced the very group that Esper defends (bruinalumni.com/antonio/victory.html):

I am not in agreement with most of its precepts... Of course I renounce its philosophy

Obviously, TonyVillar knows something that Dilan Esper and other MEChA defenders don't. Of course, there remains much that TonyVillar needs to distance himself from; see the other links above.

Posted by TLB | February 12, 2008 12:17 AM

TLB writes: "As for Dilan Esper's comment, it's misleading to state that Prop187 was "DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL." That's what a district court said about most of it (tinyurl.com/2puu22). However, the state could have appealed. Following a long process, they just let it die. It was never taken to a higher level."

In other words, it WAS declared unconstitutional, and that's a fact. There's nothing even remotely misleading about saying so.

TLB is just another lying racist nativist fuckstain, unable to live without expressing his deep-rooted bigotry each and every day. It would be tragic if it weren't so common.

Posted by MoeLarryAndJesus | February 12, 2008 12:26 AM

It would be tragic if it weren't so common.

Instead, it's just fucking hilarious to see someone who 'lives' in LA just to feed the hatred, pining for the days when the Irish were treated... well, just the way Whack O'Mole thinks of TheBrownMenace.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | February 12, 2008 12:34 AM

These threads are always so depressing. Why does this blog attract so many nativist bigots?

Posted by Keith M Ellis | February 12, 2008 1:48 AM

pining for the days when the Irish were treated... well, just the way Whack O'Mole thinks of TheBrownMenace.

You could substitute "Irish" for Mexcian and "Catholic Church" for MECHA, while maintaining the dual loyalties theme in TLB's rhetoric, and you wouldn't be that far off.

Posted by Josh | February 12, 2008 8:53 AM

As for Dilan Esper's comment, it's misleading to state that Prop187 was "DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL." That's what a district court said about most of it (tinyurl.com/2puu22). However, the state could have appealed. Following a long process, they just let it die. It was never taken to a higher level

First, TLB, CALL HIM ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA. Again, you just look like a HUGE JERK when you call him by something other than his preferred name. I'd like to see you call him "Tony Villar" to his face. Have some guts. It's easy for people to do this crap on the Internet where they don't have to be held accountable.

Second, Proposition 187 WAS unconstitutional. THERE WAS A FRICKING CONTROLLING SUPREME COURT AUTHORITY, PLYER V. DOE, ON THE ISSUE. Sorry if you and your right wing friends didn't get the opportunity to have the case taken up to a higher level where IT WOULD HAVE ONCE AGAIN BEEN DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL. But the state had every right to determine that it wasn't worth paying to defend an obviously unconstitutional law.

Obviously, TonyVillar knows something that Dilan Esper and other MEChA defenders don't. Of course, there remains much that TonyVillar needs to distance himself from; see the other links above.

That's no coup de grace. What VILLARAIGOSA (again, STOP BEING A JERK AND CALL HIM BY HIS PREFERRED NAME!) said is completely consistent with what I said, which is NOBODY BELIEVES THIS BS EXCEPT ANTI-HISPANIC BIGOTS. So stop being one.

Again, cool down. Life's GREAT here in LA. If you learn to be less paranoid, you will find you have nothing to worry about with immigration.

Posted by Dilan Esper | February 12, 2008 2:13 PM

I'm confident that Dilan Esper has "nothing to worry about with immigration". I'm equally confident that he doesn't earn his living in the building trades or blue-collar manufacturing, and that he's not trying to get his kids, if any, educated in a working-class neighborhood whose schools are flooded by the children of illiterate compesinos like the ER's where he doesn't get his healthcare.

I've got nothing against immigrants in general, or Mexicans in particular. I've got a lot against a non-system that degrades the conditions of our already-existing poorer classes by the ruthless exploitation of desperate peons who are allowed to undermine our legal system for the benefit of corporate profits. Constantly making excuses for this rotten system while accusing those who point out its problems as bigots is elitism at its worst, and doubly stupid for Democrats. By rights, this should be one of our strongest issues.

Posted by Robert Powell | February 13, 2008 11:44 AM