Rod Dreher: December 2007 Archives

This really does take the proverbial cake. Huckabee, who has lost the Iowa lead of late owing to Romney's negative ads, called a press conference today to inform reporters that he had decided not to run a new negative ad attacking Romney, because as Huck put it, quoting the Bible, "What does it profit a man to gain the world, but lose his soul?"

He then tried to show the gathered media the ad, in a transparent attempt both to get the message out via unpaid media, and to get credit for supposedly taking the high road. I'm sorry, but this is as phony as all get-out. I've made no secret of my enthusiasm for Huck's candidacy, and I hope he wins Iowa, but this smells of Eddie Haskell. The same Jesus Christ who warned his followers not to risk their souls for worldly gain also said, in Matthew Chapter 6:

1 "(But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. 2 When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites 2 do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, 4 so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you. 5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. 6 But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you."

Live by the Word, die by the Word...

As he explains in this column, Philip J. Hubbell used to live in a middle-class north Texas suburb. Property values had been going up. The neighborhood was ethnically mixed, and even had gay couples living in it. And this was fine by him: according to Hubbell, everybody understood that respecting each other and living in community meant keeping order. Then, amid the post-9/11 recession, which hit north Texas hard, illegal immigrants started to move in. And then:

All of a sudden, we had many new residents who could not speak English and who didn't appear to be interested in learning. It wasn't a melting pot so much as a ghetto. ...

People who didn't care what their houses and yards looked like moved into the neighborhood. The residents of a house might have six to eight cars with a garage filled to overflowing with old furniture and appliances. When room ran out in driveways and in front of a house, the cars moved into yards. Then property values started to slip. ...

I could see the years of equity we put into our house slipping down the drain as our once-pleasant mixed neighborhood turned into a dump. I could also see that neither the federal government, nor the state government, nor the city government was going to do anything to help people like me. And I know how the game is played in the media: People like me are routinely depicted as ignorant racist rednecks. We can't win.

I made the decision to relocate three years early. Better to go while I can still get value out of my property, I thought. I figure we lost $20,000 on our place, but I'm happy to have cut my losses. We live in a mixed-ethnicity neighborhood here in Omaha, and we're happy about it. Having Hispanic neighbors was never the issue. Having immigrant neighbors who weren't neighborly, and may not even have been legal, was.

Frustrated middle-class homeowners are never going to get a fair shake in this national debate. But when you start to wonder where your tax base has gone, and why your local school system is in trouble, and why so many of us distrust and despise politicians and the news media over this immigration issue, give a thought to us.

A reader writes:

Sir!

I might be a crunchy-con but I am not a Christian. Where are my people? I have tried to locate the non-chrispy crunchies to no avail, any tips would be much appreciated!

I appreciate your work very much,

best for the new year!

beau in roanoke, VA

Y'all speak up!

Sorry to belabor this, but I want to thank Mark Krikorian for saying this on The Corner about the "Texan of the Year" hoohah (I haven't put the links into Mark's original comments; follow the link in the previous sentence to read it in its full, hyperlink-rich context) I've put the boldface in words below:

The Dallas Morning News has named "The Illegal Alien" as its 2007 Texan of the Year. It makes more sense than Vladimir Putin, and the designation obviously recognizes the importance of the immigration issue, rather than acclaiming the wonderfulness of illegals. I agree with Michelle that the accompanying essay is squishy and timid, though it's positively Tancredo-ite compared to any other paper other than the Washington Times. One criticism I don't get at all is Larry Auster's attack on NR alum Rod Dreher, who, it turns out, ghosted the piece on behalf of the editorial board, on which he sits. (Larry's postings are here, here, and here, and Rod's response here.) The DMN piece's one-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand pose is indeed silly, but it represents the newspaper's corporate position, not Rod's, which is much more hawkish. In fact, I'm fairly sure that if Rod hadn't drafted it, the piece wouldn't have given as respectful a hearing as it did to the pro-enforcement, low-immigration side of the issue. I like Larry and often find him insightful, but he doesn't seem to appreciate that any social change needs people inside mainstream institutions trying to change their positions, as well as others on the outside taking an uncompromising stance; reflexively calling the insiders sellouts, or the outsiders cranks, doesn't move the ball forward.

The Dallas Morning News editorial board blog is being overwhelmed by comments, almost all of them furious, at the paper for naming the Illegal Immigrant as Texan of the Year. It's clear that the readers are ignoring all the information and argumentation in the essay discussing why illegal immigration is bad for Texas and the US. The point of the essay was not to argue in favor of illegal immigration, but rather to present both sides of this red-hot issue as fairly as possibly, and to conclude by saying that this issue is an urgent and direct challenge that the country can't put off dealing with.

If you have an interest in this issue, I really hope you'll read the essay and decide for yourself if it was fair and balanced. Had it come across as advocating for my personal beliefs on the immigration issue, I would have failed as an editorial writer. Anyway, this is the quality of many of the posts we're getting from readers on our site:

Posted by DH @ 11:23 PM Sun, Dec 30, 2007

J. Herrod stated: "What is your plan to rounding up 12 million people and deporting them back to Mexico or where ever they came from? Tell us the plan, with specifics..."

Well, J. H., Hitler and his cronies sent a huge number of people (over 6 million) away in rail cars in record time. I'm not advocating the 1940s going on again, but I am saying it is very logistically possible to deport people en masse (humanely), especially these days with advanced intelligence.