Chavez strikes again
Linda Chavez wrote two insane columns in which she denounced all conservatives opposed to the immigration bill as anti-Hispanic bigots. National Review senior editor Ramesh Ponnuru said he would never trust her judgment again, which seemed like a fair statement to me. But now, instead of following through on Ponnuru’s comment and ignoring and shunning Loony Linda, National Review Online has just published a 5,000 word screed by her in which, after some initial insincere apologies for her earlier too sweeping indictment of conservatives, she expands on that indictment. Among other targets, she accuses the respected journalist Heather Mac Donald of anti-Hispanic bias, for pointing out that we are importing illiterates from Mexico. If Mac Donald, who has never talked about race in her articles on immigration, is bigoted, then any critical discussion of immigration is impossible, period. Also, like the lunatic she has become, Chavez keeps returning obsessively to the Pioneer Fund and to FAIR’s origins in the population control movement, as though this makes anything to do with the immigration control movement evil.
It is just amazing what you can get away with, if you’re a member of the “conservative” establishment. I was called a racist and closed out of FrontPage Magazine for unspecified statements on race. Chavez brutally smeared the entire staff of National Review as racists, and in response they let her publish a 5,000 word article attacking them further!
The irony is, Chavez’s own background is half British; her Mexican ancestors have lived in this country for centuries; she has been married for 40 years to an American Jew, and there is nothing remotely “Hispanic” about her persona. Her personality is pure Beltway. But some weird atavism has driven her at this stage of her unworthy career to identify totally with “Hispanics,” with all Hispanics, with the Hispanic wretched of the earth, against America.
Anthony Damato writes:
This is some darn good writing. You once again cut through the fog to expose the substance of an issue… You raise a very important point I’ve thought about myself, but could not articulate, and that Chavez’s allegiance is not with her British or American side, but with her long vestigial Mexican ancestry.LA writes:
More than for the praise, thank you for seeing what you saw.Anthony replies:
Thank you.LA replies:
It’s true that Malkin does not put forward anything about her ethnicity. At the same time, Malkin exclusively addresses illegal immigration and has never said anything against current legal immigration, which, given her huge output on illegal immigration, is very strange. I think only modern journalists and intelligentsia could bifurcate an issue to this degree. In fact the distinction between the illegal and the legal while important is not fundamental. For decades they have been two parallel parts of the same phenomenon which is transforming America into a non-Western country which will have no less and less connection with its historic identity and culture and where whites will be an ever shrinking minority.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 11, 2007 02:18 PM | Send