BadEagle.com Header Image

 

Bad Eagle Journal

Does Malkin Push the Immigration Envelope?

by David Yeagley · May 23, 2007 · 25 Comments ·

Last night (May 22, 2007) on Bill O’Reilly’s show, Michelle Malkin was substituting for Bill, as she frequently does. The feature story was about a prostitution ring centered in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Apparently a major operation was busted, and two thirds of the women “working” in it were all illegal immigrants. Eight houses were raided across the state. ICE (U.S. Imimigration and Customs Enforcement) and local police cooperated in the sting, although the police were “conspiculously absent” in the actual raids, according to guest, Attorney Scott Johnson. They had been deeply involved in the investigation, but not the actual arrests.

Well, this just made for some fine conversation. An additional part of the story–and probably the only part that made it all “newsworthy,” was the part about immigration activists protesting in the streets immediately after the raids. That’s a bit of curious timing, wouldn’t you say? Well, Minneapolis has always been a liberal Commie place, so this comes as no surprise. Johnson made some rather horrific statements about police cooperation with, not ICE enforcement, but with illegal immigrants. Minneapolis is apparently a sanctuary city for illegals.

For “fair and balanced” reporting, Michelle also had guest Michael Wildes, an immigration attorney. Wildes of course emphasized distorted aspects of the situation: Are they saying that the illegal aliens are immoral because they frequent a house of ill repute? They are creating fear and chaos, Michelle, by going into homes throughout the area. Bottom line, they should be going consistently against all violators — employers who give safe haven to people who work illegally, not just the criminal ones.

That’s what balance is all about: distortion, usually. Gee, don’t come down on the poor illegals. Come down on the people that employ them, too! Of course. That happens to be a valid point. But Wildes is making it because he defends illegal immigrants for a living. In other words, his purpose is to protect them, and to insure their presence here. But then Wlides comes on with the hackneyed immigration defense: Why isn’t immigration in suits at press conferences explaining that we are a country of immigrants and that we are going to go after the bad guys, but we’re going to leave the good guys alone? In other words, you can be a good illegal immigrant, but you can’t be a “bad” illegal immigrant. This is absolutely brilliant thinking, right?

At this point, I felt worried for Malkin. There she sat, in all her “brown” glory, barely American, chronologically, daughter of adult immigrants (Filipino) and taking a very strong stance against immigration–that is, illegal immigration?

No. Her preponderant beef, in this episode, was with the wrongness of forcing illegal women into sexual immorality. This was a women’s issue for her, apparently, more than anything else. “This is not about targeting brown people or people of color as a lot of these groups are whining,” she said. It was about abusing women.

Wildes thought is was unfair to hit the “bad” illegal immigrants without the “good” ones, and their “American” employers. Michelle thought, regardless, it was good that the women were rescued from their immediate plight. Johnson thought the whole police department and city council were complicit–and that’s the real story.

Michelle Malkin, (born to Filipino parents in America on work visa, 1970) and others like Dinesh D’Souza (Hindu immigrant, 1978), are put in a most peculiar position, speaking of the glories of being American. I was holding my breath, in dread that Wildes was going to say something to Michelle about that. When he said, repeatedly, “This is a nation of immigrants,” (which is really isn’t–based on a fundamental concept of nationhood), I wonder how Michelle would have responded, had he directed his point to her personally. Conservatives certainly like to feature non-white immigrants who espouse conservative values. This insulates conservatives from any undue charges of prejudice or redneck-ism, as the liberals are wont to accuse them of.


Michelle Malkin, married Jessi Malkin (Rhodes Scholar and Rand economist-turned
conservative at Oberlin College, of all places!)

So what is the response? A nation belongs to the people who founded it and built it, not those who came in later. Everyone else is an add-on. Nothing wrong with that. But I’m wondering why the emphasis on, or, what is the effect of, promoting conservative immigrants? I think it sends the message that America is simply an idea. America is an ideological value system, not really a country, in the historical sense, by definition. America is then actually the exception to every concept of nationhood in the history of man. This is the conclusion, if one neglects to consider the plain and obvious White Anglo-Saxon Protestant base of the the American colonies and their government.

Some people see this as the difference between paleo-conservatism and neo-conservatism. It’s the difference of understanding of nationhood. What is a nation? How does it come about? How does it become strong, and endure? I think these questions are fundamental. It isn’t about the legality or illegality of immigration, per se. That isn’t the deepest concern. What kind of nation is America that one is to come here and forsake one’s forumer culture, and pretend one is without ethnicity at all? Is that what it takes for America to work? Many people disagree with that–especially Arabs Muslims and Mexicans.

In any case, Michelle’s program last night seemed to dramatize the contrasts and tensions in the whole issue, including the absence of the more fundamental aspects of it–nationhood. So, it isn’t about illegal immigrants or legal immigrants. It’s about immigrants, period.

Posted by David Yeagley · May 23, 2007 · 11:46 am CT · ·

Tags: Bad Eagle Journal




Read More Journal Posts »

25 responses so far ↓

  • 1 ecology // May 23, 2007 at 12:41 pm   

    Doc,
    No legal citizen that wants this insanity to end has a chance. The MAJORITY in this country want things to be done. But the top dogs are not lisening. The minority is in charge now. War is in the air.

  • 2 ecology // May 23, 2007 at 12:48 pm   

    doc,
    the “conservatives” have failed on this miserabley. From what I see citizens are getting sick and tired of the bread and circuses. Poor Michelle has no chance on this issue. Orielly is way better off. His kind the irish slaves actually helped build this so called nation. Nationhood is what its all about. anything else needs to be get in the back of the line.
    Illegal is illegal. Illegal is not “good”.

  • 3 David Yeagley // May 23, 2007 at 1:25 pm   

    I think it’s kind of a weak ploy to put up “legal” immigrants as spokesmen for legal immigration. It’s too obvious.

    Michelle is no immigrant, but, let’s just say, she doens’t LOOK American–however good she looks! Ha, ha!

    White conservatives so often HIDE behind fronts of one kind or another. Afraid of liberal whites calling them “racists.”

    This insults all people of color, really.

  • 4 ecology // May 23, 2007 at 1:31 pm   

    Thanks doc. You figured out what I was wondering about I was wondering why they use them like tokens. It does insult all of us. I liek Michelle too! ;-) I think seh has some spunk thats for sure. But she has no chance on this issue. The moderate conservatives and the RINO’s need to be punched and kicked out of the party.

  • 5 Sheik Yerbouti // May 23, 2007 at 4:06 pm   

    “A nation belongs to the people who founded it and built it, not those who came in later.”

    And in the US, who specifically might these people be, in your opinion?

  • 6 Sheik Yerbouti // May 23, 2007 at 4:23 pm   

    “White conservatives so often HIDE behind fronts of one kind or another. Afraid of liberal whites calling them “racists.”

    This insults all people of color, really.”

    Like Ward Connerly leading the fight to abolish Affirmative Action even though he personally benefited from it.

  • 7 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 2:52 am   

    “Conservatives certainly like to feature non-white immigrants who espouse conservative values.”

    That’s because there are so few of them. Rarity is facinating and special.

  • 8 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 2:52 am   

    “Conservatives certainly like to feature non-white immigrants who espouse conservative values.”

    That’s because there are so few of them. Rarity is facinating and special.

  • 9 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 3:04 am   

    Sheik Yerbouti,

    you have a point. The last thing people of color should want to do is, compete with whitey, for the most part, on an even playing field. Their nurturing and Bell Curve standings makes life a hard nut to crack.

  • 10 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 3:04 am   

    Sheik Yerbouti,

    you have a point. The last thing people of color should want to do is, compete with whitey, for the most part, on an even playing field. Their nurturing and Bell Curve standings makes life a hard nut to crack.

  • 11 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 9:46 am   

    What does “whitey” know about an even playing field given that the game has been rigged in his favor for two hundred some odd years?

    Do a little research outside of FOX TV and Bad Eagle and you’ll realize that up until very recently it was perfectly LEGAL in America to deny black people housing, jobs, and a quality education.

    How could whites not have benefited unfairly.

    Read Ira Katznelson’s chronicle “When Affirmative Action was White” and learn how the US GOVERNMENT financed the white urban ethnic and southern whites ascension into the middle class after WWII with GI education loans and zero interest housing loans for newly built suburban housing that was totally denied to black Americans.

    Then get back to me about an “even playing field”.

  • 12 ecology // May 24, 2007 at 10:06 am   

    Give them the oil dependent suburbs. Its a doomed living arangement anyway. They did them a favor.

  • 13 David Yeagley // May 24, 2007 at 10:48 am   

    Sheik, if you’re an American black, why on earth feign an Arabic Muslim name?

    If you are a different black, looking at American black history objectively, you should recognize that Black Americans are the most fortunate blacks in the world.

    I’m getting mixed messages from you on this. The Nation of Islam is not really part of Islam, in my opinion. It is a unique black American thing. To my knowlege, which is quite limited on this, The Nation of Islam has not been associated with Muslim terrorism.

    I think there are American blacks who have gone “Muslim,” who are not part of the Nation of Islam, either.

    Tricky situation. What are you?

    This thread is about immigration, legal, illegal, whatever. Why are you making it a “black” thread? This is what I mean about blacks always bringing attention to themselves as center stage, no matter what the topic, no matter what the people or persons in the subject.

    This is offensive. The world is NOT black. It just isn’t. People resent blacks always trying to make it black. The world is TIRED of that line. I know that’s you line, but, consider others.

  • 14 ecology // May 24, 2007 at 11:32 am   

    Thank you doctor,
    What ever happend to just being American? Americans are the most priveleged people in the world. The blacks in this country are well off. I mean so many success stories. We all have to struggle unless we have had old money handed to us. Sheesh it is beyond tiring. yawn.

  • 15 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 12:07 pm   

    Actually Yeagley my initial post was in response to your assertion that “A nation belongs to the people who founded it and built it, not those who came in later”

    I asked you who exactly were the people who “built” America in your opinion and who exactly are those who “came later”.

    You haven’t answered.

    You also were the one who made the assertion that white rightwingers often used black as fronts to protect themselves from charges of racism.

    I then presented Ward Connerly as an example.

    Then poster “Greetings” made a comment about “even playing fields” which I promptly dissected and took apart.

    I made no mention of the Nation of Islam and “Sheik Yerbouti” is the name of an old Frank Zappa song.

    NOW, do you mind answering my question?

  • 16 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 1:00 pm   

    “This is offensive. The world is NOT black. It just isn’t. People resent blacks always trying to make it black. The world is TIRED of that line. I know that’s you line, but, consider others.”

    Wow this is deep.

    “The World” (I guess you mean non-blacks) resents blacks trying to make the world “black”.

    I’d ask you to elaborate on this statement but I’d bet that you couldn’t even if you tried.

  • 17 David Yeagley // May 24, 2007 at 1:02 pm   

    Do you mind reading? You’re questions were addressed in the blog.

    Pardon my unfamiliarity with American pop culture. I’m a classical musician, with aversion to most popular music…

    And you are skirting the issue of what a nation is. If you have no concept of that, you’ll never recognize any answer to your question–at least not the answers I’ve already given.

    Look, blacks are for blacks. I don’t criticize that. People should look out for their own. I grant everyone the right to love and honor and preserve his own people

    Problem is, here, blackness is not exactly an ethnicity, or a tribe, or a culture. It’s bits and pieces of old Africa. The America black is truly unique in the world, I think.

    So, are we finished talking about blacks now? This is not a black thread, not written about blacks, and not do be dominated by black assertions.

    Please have consideration for other people. Go to a black site if you want to concentrate on black things.

  • 18 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 1:37 pm   

    Please answer my question Dr. Yeagley.

    PLEASE. It’s a very simple question.

    Who exactly were the people who “built” America in your opinion and who exactly are those who “came later”?

    If it’s “in the blog” as you claim, I missed it.

    Please answer.

  • 19 David Yeagley // May 24, 2007 at 1:46 pm   

    You insult me, as well as yourself.

    “America is then actually the exception to every concept of nationhood in the history of man. This is the conclusion, if one neglects to consider the plain and obvious White Anglo-Saxon Protestant base of the the American colonies and their government.”

    I would guess you don’t agree, anyway.

  • 20 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 2:37 pm   

    We all know that WASPs were the first colonists and they established a parliamentary democractic form of government,in which white males were the only ones who initially had rights.

    But your assertion was who “built” America and who America “belongs to”.

    Now, I dare you to say straight up that WASPs built America and it only belongs to them.

    I dare you.

  • 21 concha // May 24, 2007 at 3:26 pm   

    My favorite Frank Zappa song is “Cosmic Debris”…it’s a classic.

    Everyone built America! Sheik, I think you are coming from a southern perspective. Mine is southwestern, therefore, the builders of America for me were the Spanish, Mexicans, Indians, Chinese, Irish, Anglos, French, some Italians, a few scattered Germans, Prussians, Blacks, a handful of Russians, Ashkanazi Jews, Armenians, and the Dutch.
    Every race has toiled, despaired, and worked hard to make this a great country. It’s just that anglos and blacks seem to get all of the fanfare.

    Truly, we are all “mothers of invention.”

  • 22 Sheik Yerbouti // May 24, 2007 at 3:35 pm   

    Yeah Yeagley,

    Go ahead and block my comments.

    You’re such a coward.

  • 23 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 3:42 pm   

    Shiek,

    the blacks in this country represent the third largest nation in the world, with respect to GNP if in fact they were considered a nation.

    When blacks marry and “both” actually work, their incomes are the same as whites.

    The problems blacky still has are caused by blacky, bastardism and high criminality.

    Blacky in America “today” not yesterday, is doing better than many whites in Africa, where the blacks are treating them with get even racism, and running the nations into the ground with their poor management and high crime.

    Any good the black race in America has done, by in large, has been trumped by their violent criminality and support of the DNC. I wish my grandparents had 1/10th of the give away opportunity blacks have gotten out of America.

    TAKE PEOPLE OF COLOR OUT OF CRIME STATISTICS IN AMERICA AND YOU HAVE THE LOWEST CRIME RATE IN THE WORLD!

    The ghettos they rote in were once thriving low crime, vibrant econonomic centers that were destroyed by their black animus that is rooted in Africa and brought to America. Male blacky not wanting to work or nurture his young is a “black thang” rooted in Africa, the mother land.

  • 24 "Greetings, my son!" // May 24, 2007 at 3:42 pm   

    Shiek,

    the blacks in this country represent the third largest nation in the world, with respect to GNP if in fact they were considered a nation.

    When blacks marry and “both” actually work, their incomes are the same as whites.

    The problems blacky still has are caused by blacky, bastardism and high criminality.

    Blacky in America “today” not yesterday, is doing better than many whites in Africa, where the blacks are treating them with get even racism, and running the nations into the ground with their poor management and high crime.

    Any good the black race in America has done, by in large, has been trumped by their violent criminality and support of the DNC. I wish my grandparents had 1/10th of the give away opportunity blacks have gotten out of America.

    TAKE PEOPLE OF COLOR OUT OF CRIME STATISTICS IN AMERICA AND YOU HAVE THE LOWEST CRIME RATE IN THE WORLD!

    The ghettos they rote in were once thriving low crime, vibrant econonomic centers that were destroyed by their black animus that is rooted in Africa and brought to America. Male blacky not wanting to work or nurture his young is a “black thang” rooted in Africa, the mother land.

  • 25 concha // May 24, 2007 at 4:20 pm   

    David Yeagley,

    The great Frank Zappa was himself a classically trained musican–in fact, his music is deemed too difficult to perfom by most pop musicians.

    I dare you to listen to him–I think you would appreciate his textured arrangements and unique composing skills. In fact, if you did a review of one of Frank Zappa’s albums, like say, “Apostrope” or “Weasels Ripped My Flesh” I would buy five copies of your book. That’s a promise.

You must log in to post a comment.