What, no comments from apologists? I’m shocked!

Unless, of course, *no one* actually likes the guy. :-P

Posted by Tim McCormack on 1 June 02007 @ 12pm

OK, I’ll play. First I have to concede that his actual words are pretty indefensible. That having been said, I think what he was *trying* to say is valid: That the Left (personified by the New York Times in his example) is seeking an end-run around the current electorate by legalizing 12 million (or however many millions) foreign nationals who in the aggregate will shift this country’s politics to the Left, that is, away from white, Christian males who are obviously disproportionately conservative.

The hilarious thing is that they’re being aided in this effort by the Alpha Dog white, Christian male bogeyman – W himself.

Posted by Judge Smails on 1 June 02007 @ 1pm

If that’s so, it seems that Republicans are claiming the mantle of victimization from Democrats. Pity the poor, white, Christian men who run the country, for they may have to reduce their dominance to a mere supermajority.

Posted by Waldo Jaquith on 1 June 02007 @ 2pm

Well, that’s one way of looking at it. Another would be that people like O’Reilly are standing up for the law in the face of those who would trample it for the sake of greater power.

Posted by Judge Smails on 1 June 02007 @ 2pm

At a glance, you have to admit that it does seem funny that the Social Conservative body of the Republican party no likey the Mexicans and Muslims. With their combined conservative stances, think of the voting power the Right would have to keep us safe from gay people.

Posted by corycapron on 2 June 02007 @ 12am

Waldo, I am no fan of Bill O’Reilly, but don’t twist what he said. O’Reilly said that the New York Times is trying to break down the white male power structure by flooding the country with millions of illegal immigrants.

Don’t you want to preserve our culture? Doesn’t our society have anything to recommend it? Don’t we have a stable republic where people respect the law and even our leaders? While lots of people may be disgusted with George W. Bush, we voted to put him in charge. Even if you do not like Bush, only the most idiotic fool would rather have some self-elected tyrant in charge.

This immigration wave differs from past immigrations in one important respect. It is too easy to get here. In fact, people are just hiking across the border. So we are getting hordes of uneducated people coming to this country. Because democracy depends upon a large, educated middle class, this vast influx of uneducated people threatens the stability of our society.

Because they are not full citizens, the illegal immigrants coming to this country represent a new kind of serf class, and these people are still happy to be here — for the time being. But because of their immigration status, the illegal immigrants are easily exploited by employers.

Unfortunately, too many employers like illegal immigration, and leaders in both the Republican and Democratic Party are willing to cater to these employers. The elite in this country just don’t get it. Apparently, they like to see us all as ignorant serfs.

The vast majority of the people in this country want the illegal immigration stopped. They don’t hate foreigners. They just do not want the wages of low wage workers depressed. They do not want bigger tax bills because of welfare payments. They do not want a bilingual society. They do not want terrorists sneaking across the border. The want our border enforced, and that does not make them bigots.

Posted by Citizen Tom on 3 June 02007 @ 10am

The vast majority of the people in this country want the illegal immigration stopped. They don’t hate foreigners. They just do not want the wages of low wage workers depressed. They do not want bigger tax bills because of welfare payments. They do not want a bilingual society. They do not want terrorists sneaking across the border. The want our border enforced, and that does not make them bigots.

I would fit in this description, with the exception of a bilingual society. I could handle that as long as people were here legally.

I, however, am not, in any way, standing up for Bill O’Reilly.

Posted by Sarabeth on 3 June 02007 @ 6pm

Don’t you want to preserve our culture? Doesn’t our society have anything to recommend it? Don’t we have a stable republic where people respect the law and even our leaders? While lots of people may be disgusted with George W. Bush, we voted to put him in charge. Even if you do not like Bush, only the most idiotic fool would rather have some self-elected tyrant in charge.

What’choo smokin’, Tom? Point-by-point:

There are parts of our culture I want to preserve, and parts I think need to go. Do we really respect the law? Do we really respect our leaders? (Last look at the opinion poll says “No.”) GW was elected by the Supreme Court with evidence of massive voter fraud and without the support of the popular vote. (In 2004 he was a war president, and those always get a second term.) And what does “self-elected tyrant” mean? A unilateralist?

Posted by Tim McCormack on 4 June 02007 @ 10am

Along the lines of culture preservation–American culture is comprised of many cultures. Culture preservation isn’t something that bothers me.

Posted by Sarabeth on 4 June 02007 @ 2pm

Culture preservation is something that concerns us all. Progress is define by two factors: preservation of the good aspects of our society and learning how to improve.

Our values define what is worth preserving and what constitutes an improvement. A free society is one that gives us all a vote as to which parts of our culture are worth preserving and what constitutes an improvement.

Posted by Citizen Tom on 7 June 02007 @ 10pm