tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post615813568393300378..comments2023-10-31T05:07:19.353-04:00Comments on Delenda est Carthago: Numbers USADr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-51894861661847049682009-02-09T13:43:00.000-05:002009-02-09T13:43:00.000-05:00Come now. I'm sure that the New York Times would b...Come now. I'm sure that the New York Times would be just as aggressive in pursuing connections between a liberal cause (pro-choice, to pick a random example) to eugenics.<BR/><BR/>Right?<BR/><BR/>To more directly answer your question, I would say yes, the NYT counts as among those that cannot be counted on to portray the issue with even a remote degree of even-handedness. At the same time, people don't take what they say as gospel. It's helpful not to feed their attempts to frame the issue as one of Good Americans vs Grubby Racists.<BR/><BR/>I guess I can really only speak for myself to say that I am relatively moderate on the merits of the subject of immigration. I'm suspicious of amnesty, I support some measures to cut down on illegal immigration... but I'm off-put enough by the framing of the issue from folks on your side that more often than not I side with the other. <BR/><BR/>More voices with a moderate tone would go a way towards alleviating my fears of taking up some of the border-control causes and be more willing to give voice to my concerns with the high levels of immigration. As it stands now, it feels like whenever I do I feed a somewhat nasty fire.trumwillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03156143676616919381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-77550844949970365662009-02-08T19:59:00.000-05:002009-02-08T19:59:00.000-05:00Fair enough, assuming that I get to count the NYT ...Fair enough, assuming that I get to count the <A HREF="http://isteve.blogspot.com/2009/02/third-nyt-editorial-denouncing.html" REL="nofollow">NYT</A> as among "certain segments of the Left":<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/the-nativist-lobby/#comment-145227" REL="nofollow">"The Nativist Lobby"</A><BR/><BR/><I>Numbers USA even took credit for a storm of blast faxes and phone calls to Congress that helped to kill a major immigration bill in 2007. <BR/><BR/>What is less well known, the [SPLC] report says, is what the groups have in common: histories connecting them to a retired Michigan eye doctor [John Tanton] with a long-held interest in eugenics, racial quotas, and white nationalism.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>Guilt by association!Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14252946969701576139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-90480691216796539702009-02-05T13:44:00.000-05:002009-02-05T13:44:00.000-05:00Anti-immigration folks will be called racist by ce...Anti-immigration folks will be called racist by certain segments of the left regardless of what they say and how they say it, but whether or not the pro-immigration people will be successful in their attempts to tag antis as such does depend pretty heavily on how they present their argument. That's why the moderate tone is important.trumwillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03156143676616919381noreply@blogger.com