See, earlier: Robert Sussman’s “Tainted Sources”—Playing The Telephone Game Against AMERICAN RENAISSANCE’s Jared Taylor

To enter the 2019 VDARE.com War On Christmas Competition, email reports of egregious examples of War On Christmas attacks to either VDARE.com editor Peter Brimelow [pbrimelow@vdare.com]  or VDARE.com Editor James Fulford. [jfulford@vdare.com]

At WWL Radio in New Orleans,  there's a journalist who calls himself "Scoot" [Tweet him] pictured right, who has a conspiracy theory about the War on Christmas. Scoot (Scott Paisant in real life) says it isn't really happening, and we made it up.  In Scoot: Is the “War on Christmas” a conspiracy theory? he recycles old attacks on VDARE.com and its Editor Peter Brimelow by the Daily Beast's Max Blumenthal, the $PLC, and others into a farrago of nonsense.

What “Scoot” exemplifies is the Telephone Game, which has been described as "The game where you sit in a circle and the first person whispers a phrase in the ear of the person next to him, until the phrase reaches the last person. When the phrase is spoken out loud by the last person, you find out that it’s altered in a very unexpected way. "

When Peter Brimelow was growing up in England, this same game was known, no doubt Deplorably, as  "Chinese Whispers", and that's what the Wikipedia article on it is called. The point is that they pass these things around without ever checking them, and get them wrong.

So here's what Scoot has to say:

The bigger question is whether the “War on Christmas” is real or an agenda-inspired myth?

Bill O’Reilly, when he was on the Fox News Channel, was credited with regenerating the “War on Christmas” in 2004 and went so far as to declare it a national emergency. But the alleged “War on Christmas” actually dates back to the early 1920s.

Wrong. In fact, there was a big kerfuffle about Christmas carols in New York City schools back in 1906. Our longtime War On Christmas chronicler  Tom Piatak wrote here in 2005 that there was  "a walkout of 20,000 Jewish students from the New York City public schools in 1906 to protest the singing of Christmas carols [This Season's War Cry: Commercialize Christmas, or Else, By Adam Cohen, NYT, December 4, 2005]. Thus the War on Christmas was not made up by Henry Ford, as Scoot suggests below. In 1955 National Review editorialized about the War On Christmas in the New York Schools as well.[Krismas, PDF, November 26, 1955].

“Scoot” goes on:

In 1921, automaker Henry Ford began spreading the idea that Christmas cards were difficult to find, and he accused Jews in America of working to abolish Christmas in public places. It was true that a few Jewish leaders challenged the practice of reading the Bible in classrooms of public schools, but that was a debate about the First Amendment rather than a Jewish conspiracy to abolish Christmas in public.

But what Henry Ford or his ghostwriter actually said was that it was difficult to find "Christmas cards that indicated in any way that Christmas commemorated Someone’s Birth" i.e.. lots of Santas, but no Jesuses.

We're not responsible for the fact that Henry Ford Noticed this, and using Ford as a stick to beat Christmas with is common. But in Telephone Game terms, you can see that “Scoot” has not only failed to check the original Ford quote, but he hasn't even understood the quote as reproduced by, say, Daniel Denvir in Politico [ A Short History of the War on Christmas , December 16, 2013] or by Snopes.[A History of the ‘War on Christmas’, by David Emery, November 29, 2017]

“Scoot” blunders on:

Earlier by Ann Coulter: “We'll Tell You Who's Privileged”

I gather it would be proof positive of “white nationalism” to point out that the only group discriminated against in college admissions is white people.

We’ve heard a lot about discrimination against Asians lately, which reminds me: Asians are SO lucky they’re not white! Otherwise, America’s leading hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, would be churning out reports on the worrying rise in Asian Supremacy.

In fact, however, a recent study by Georgetown University (probably White Nationalist), funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (presumed hate group), found that if colleges admitted students based solely on SAT scores, every single ethnic group would decline, except one: whites.

Earlier by Michelle Malkin: Three Cheers for Refugee Reduction!

Should U.S. citizens have input into whether their neighborhoods are fundamentally and permanently transformed into United Nations refugee camps full of welfare dependents and tax burdens?

Government-funded charities that profit mightily from the federal refugee resettlement program say: "Hell, no!"

But President Donald Trump and growing numbers of informed Americans across the heartland are raising their voices to say: "Heavens, yes!"

This week, an extraordinary revolt took place in Bismarck, North Dakota, where an overflow crowd of residents braved subzero temperatures to register their opposition to allowing the Lutheran Social Services to dump any new refugees in their backyard.

New York Rep. Elise Stefanik is the GOP’s newest star. Her aggressive questioning of witnesses during last month’s impeachment hearings made her a national figure and a prominent White House ally. Many Trump supporters see Stefanik as a hero, but immigration patriots should be skeptical. The New York Republican consistently votes against patriotic immigration reform. Her sudden celebrity signifies a serious problem with Trumpism—apparent loyalty to the president matters far more than America First. But that won’t build a movement, and will permit cheap-labor enthusiasts to co-opt Trumpism for their own corrupt ends.

Let’s give credit where it’s due: Stefanik did do a number on the Democrats’ witnesses [Yovanovitch Admits Being Prepped By Obama Admin On Hunter Biden & Burisma During Confirmation, GOP War Room, Nov. 15, 2019]. Trump called her a “a new Republican star,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy praised her political skills, and other major figures want to see her in the leadership. At the same time, celebrities and prominent liberals are donating heavily to Stefanik’s Democratic opponent, further cementing her importance [Rising GOP star thrust into spotlight with Trump defense, by Juliegrace Brufke and Brett Samuels, The Hill, November 25, 2019].

Stefanik’s star power relies on the 35-year-old’s youth and sex. Few young women are in the GOP caucus and the party is desperate (foolishly, ask Ann Coulter) to have its own Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

And unlike AOC, Stefanik has brains. She’s a Harvard grad. (Perhaps significantly, she was reportedly a friend of Peter Buttigieg there—Pete Buttigieg and Elise Stefanik unlikely friends from Harvard days, by Jon Levine, November 30, 2019 ).

Yet Stefanik’s rise exposes the problem with the top shelf of the GOP on Capitol Hill: If the party fully embraced immigration patriotism, Stefanik’s immigration agenda would exclude her from leadership. She holds a dismal D career rating from NumbersUSA. (She was first elected in 2014). This term she rated a mediocre C. The low ratings are fully warranted, as her long history open-borders statements and legislation demonstrate:

• This year, Stefanik co-sponsored the “Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act,” the deceptively-named green card giveaway to India. The bill would scrap country caps and allow the tech industry to hire more foreign workers. Indians would get at least 75 percent of all employment-based visas.
• She voted against Trump’s national emergency declaration that provided essential funding for border security [ICYMI: Putting the Nation First: Stefanik Votes To Block Trump’s National Emergency Declaration, March 4, 2019, Stefanik.House.Gov]. She claimed the vote put “the nation first.”
• In 2018, she campaigned on amnesty for illegal aliens who arrived as minors (DREAMers) and ending family separation, opposed reductions in refugee resettlement and wants Congress to have authority over the matter [Stefanik balked on border bills, by Abraham Kenmore, NNY360, October 4, 2018].