Saturday Forum
Print Friendly and PDF

A California Mother Shares Her Son's View Of The Coming White Minority; etc.

From: Kate Schultz (e-mail her)

Re: Peter Brimelow's Blog: (Not) Thinking About The Coming White Minority

I thought your readers would be interested in the future of America, as seen through the eyes of my 6-year-old son.

He just started first-grade in a public school in the Bay Area. The city was reported to be 40 percent white during the last census.

During the first days of school, we went to a large mega-mart in the neighborhood to pick up supplies. Out of the nowhere, my son said to me: "Mom, I think I'm the only blue-eyed boy in my class."

He said it very matter-of-factly, as if he'd just thought of it. In fact, my son is the only blond blue-eyed kid in his classroom.

I don't know what triggered my son's observation. Perhaps it is the fact that when we do look around these days, we stick out as the only fair-skinned, light-haired people in a sea of black hair. Most of the time we don't pay attention to this, but when we do notice it, it is quite jarring to realize that  we are already minorities.

According to the 2000 Census, my town was 45 percent white in 2000. The 2006 estimate is 32 percent. My personal projection for 2010 is that whites will be 25 percent.

My husband, a professional with advanced academic degrees summed it up: "Forced diversity only makes people self-segregate into their own groups."

My question: where do California native-born European whites with conservative viewpoints on immigration find their own?

We're surrounded by ultra-liberal whites who parrot the politically correct diversity-speak. They shun conservatives.

Even though we have non-Caucasian friends, certain topics are off limits—specifically, immigration.

Schultz says that California's rapidly deteriorating quality of life will eventually force her family to leave the state, despite their life-long ties to it.

[PermaLink] [Top] [Letters Home]

A Connecticut Reader Wonders Why Phyllis Schlafly Wastes Her Time

From: Joseph Morabito (e-mail him)

The following paragraph shows what is wrong with the present-day Republican Party.

It's taken from Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum website under "News and Notes":

"2008 REPUBLICAN PLATFORM VICTORIES: On immigration, the 2008 Platform clearly breaks away from both McCain and the 2004 Platform by calling for building the border fence, securing our ports, enforcing existing laws against 'illegal workers and lawbreaking employers,' requiring the use of E-Verify, deporting criminal aliens, denying federal funds to sanctuary cities, and refusing driver's licenses, in-state college tuition rates, and Social Security benefits for illegal aliens."

What I find sad is that Schlafly (and others) are oh-so-proud of this plank as if it means something.

But the party's nominee, John McCain, is not obligated to abide by this or any other language in the platform.

Why do these people expend time, energy, and money on efforts that don't mean anything?

People should be aware that Schlafly will rail about illegal immigration, North American Union, etc, but there she was at the GOP convention.

Why didn't she support Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, or Duncan Hunter during the GOP primaries when her influence could have made a difference?

Morabito is a software engineer who last voted Republican in 1988 and this year leans toward the Constitution Party. His previous letter about McCain's immigration duplicity is here.

[PermaLink] [Top] [Letters Home]

A Nevada Reader Says Never Mind The Talking Heads, Follow the Bookmakers

From: "Whispering Eddie" (e-mail him)

I live in Las Vegas and know a little more about odds making than most.

If VDARE.COM readers really want to know who will be the next US president, they shouldn't pay any attention to Lou Dobbs or Bill O'Reilly. Just follow what the bookmakers predict.

As of today, it is apparent that this week's financial meltdown has greatly harmed John McCain in the eyes of the wise guys. Barack Obama is currently a 2-1 favorite, up from 1.5 to 1 at the beginning of the week.

McCain's performance in the first debate actually increased the price against him.

If you are inclined to disagree, remember the old saying: "The house always wins."

One more solid indicator: Barack Obama Halloween masks are outselling McCain masks by about a 2:1 ratio. Historically, the November loser has never outsold the winner.

"Whispering Eddie" says he left a dead-end insurance job in New Jersey five years ago to wager on professional sports and play poker. He says that although he is only "a few cents" ahead, he's having more fun…despite the high illegal alien population.

[PermaLink] [Top] [Letters Home]

A New Jersey Reader Notes The Big Difference Among Ted Williams, John Glenn and John McCain

From: Pete Redner (e-mail him)

Re: Today's Letter: A Missouri Reader Says McCain Milking War Record

Regarding letter writer William White's observation that McCain, working in his own interests, groups himself with Ted Williams and John Glenn in terms of heroism and aviation skills.

McCain has one not so small problem, however. He has little idea of how to fly.

McCain, let's not forget, lost five aircraft. That's hardly the case with Williams or Glenn who were outstanding pilots.

Redner's previous letters about the unfairness of the "Fairness Doctrine", the social issues that immigration adversely impacts, New Jersey's terrorists, Obama on immigration and Mexico (not Russia) as where McCain should focus his attention are here, here, here, here and here.

[PermaLink] [Top] [Letters Home]

A Massachusetts Reader Says Ted Williams Had No Use For John McCain

From: Richard Radatz (e-mail him)

Re: Joe Guzzardi's View From Lodi column Remembering Ted Williams

On the evidence of Leigh Montville's book, Ted Williams: The Biography of an American Hero, it seems McCain is unaware of how little Williams truly thought of him. 

Montville writes that in 1999, when McCain made his first presidential run, he visited Williams to get his endorsement.

Williams refused.

So for McCain to give the impression on ESPN's Mike and Mike in the Morning Show that he was close to Williams, is highly misleading and represents yet another deception from him.

[PermaLink] [Top] [Letters Home]

Print Friendly and PDF