Open Borders promises to reduce cranial capacity 50%

One proposed logo that wasn't deported when the Open Borders Logo contest closed its borders is this one showing how open borders will make us all like Siamese Twins with only one brain for every two bodies, so you won't have to do anymore of that pesky thinking for yourself.

It's also interesting how many of the (sincere) Open Borders logos are, like this one, stillborn swastikas. The Rotating Juggernaut of Doom look is highly attractive to the ideological male mind, no matter what conceits it chooses to publicly endorse.

Read More

Villaraigosa to edify Harvard

That living embodiment of the Mexican-American talent shortage, former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, has been looking for paying gigs since leaving office last month, but now Harvard has come through:

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will be a “visiting fellow” this fall at Harvard, the Ivy League school announced Monday. 

Villaraigosa will serve the short stint in the university’s Institute of Politics alongside Mitt Romney, former U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis, and Massachusetts area Sen. Mo Cowan, among others. 

In July, the former mayor was hired part-time as a Strategic Advisor for the Banc of California.

There, the 60-year-old will “advise on the development of a community banking strategy focused on expanding home ownership, financing entrepreneurs and small businesses, and investing in communities through education and service,” the company said in a statement.

The "expanding home ownership" part is pretty funny considering that Villaraigosa doesn't own a home or any other assets, other than a small rental property in Moreno Valley.

In addition to his role at the bank and Harvard, Villaraigosa receives an annual pension of more than $97,000 from the City of Los Angeles.

Yeah, but much of that goes in alimony.

It's not a total coincidence that Harvard is located 3,000 miles from Los Angeles. Antonio Villaraigosa, deep down, is still basically Tony Villar, a juvenile delinquent straight out of the lowrider scenes in American Graffiti. But, there's so little other Mexican-American talent out there that he is credibly considered a future Governor of California and was made chairman of the 2012 Democratic convention that renominated Obama.

Read More

Oprah: A victim of Shopping While Black or of Shopping While Fat?

Just about the biggest news story in the world in recent days has been how Oprah Winfrey was the victim of racism (conveniently enough, just when she needed to promote her return to movies in The Butler, about black White House servants). Oprah accused a store clerk in Switzerland of racism for not getting down a $38,000 handbag for her to inspect.

I'm always fascinated by how often Stalin is vindicated in his observation that something bad happening to one person is a tragedy while it happening to a million is a statistic. For example, 500,000 black and Latin young men getting stopped and frisked annually for the last decade in New York City is a statistic that has mildly troubled some of the more sensitive souls in the New York elite, but hasn't really been much of a story even locally, much less nationally, while Oprah not getting shown a $38,000 handbag is Breaking Global News. It's like the vast outpouring of sympathy that greets the President of the United States whenever he recounts how his grandmother wanted a ride to work one day. You might think that being black in America has, on net, been good for Obama or Oprah, but that's not a widespread impression. 

More generally, human beings feel sorrier for immensely privileged people than they do for nobodies like shopgirls and grandmas.

Little noted in the hubbub was that Oprah has a long history of complaining about being racially abused while shopping. From Wikipedia's article on Shopping While Black:

In 2001, Oprah Winfrey told Good Housekeeping magazine about how she and a black companion were turned away from a store while white people were being allowed in, allegedly because she and her friend reminded the clerks of black transsexuals who had earlier tried to rob it.[17]

Personally, if anybody thought I looked like a transsexual robber, I'd stay quiet about that, or at least leave out the detail about me looking like a transsexual. (But it's just that kind of prejudice I'm exhibiting that is the reason the media is gearing up for its post-gay marriage offensive for transgender rights.)

And in 2005, Winfrey was refused service at the Parisian luxury store Hermès as the store closed for the evening, in what her spokesperson described as "Oprah's 'Crash' moment", a reference to the 2004 movie about racial and social tensions in Los Angeles.[18]

Unlike the rest of the press, however, the Daily Mail went and asked the latest store clerk to be accused of racism by Oprah what she thought of Oprah's charge:

'Oprah's a liar': Sales assistant in Swiss racist handbag row denies telling TV host that she could not view item because she couldn't afford it 

Sale assistant said she feels 'powerless' after the racism accusations  

Oprah Winfrey claimed assistant refused to show her a handbag because it was 'too expensive'  

Speaking anonymously, shop worker said claims were 'absurd' 

By ALLAN HALL IN BERLIN

The sales assistant who refused to show U.S. talkshow billionaire Oprah Winfrey a luxury handbag costing nearly £25,000 claims the superstar lied about what happened in the luxury Swiss boutique where she works. 

Speaking anonymously to Sunday newspaper SonntagsBlick, the Italian bag lady said she felt 'powerless' and in the grip of a 'cyclone' after Winfrey went on TV in America to claim she had been the victim of racism. 

Winfrey was in Switzerland in July when she walked into the Trois Pommes boutique in Zurich looking for a handbag to match the outfit she was going to wear to old friend Tina Turner's wedding.  

She claims the sales assistant refused to show her the black crocodile leather bag because - seeing a black woman - she automatically assumed she would not be able to afford it. 

Now the saleslady has hit back, stating: 'I wasn't sure what I should present to her when she came in on the afternoon of Saturday July 20 so I showed her some bags from the Jennifer Aniston collection. 

'I explained to her the bags came in different sizes and materials, like I always do. 

'She looked at a frame behind me. Far above there was the 35,000 Swiss franc crocodile leather bag.   

'I simply told her that it was like the one I held in my hand, only much more expensive, and that I could show her similar bags. 

'It is absolutely not true that I declined to show her the bag on racist grounds. I even asked her if she wanted to look at the bag.

'She looked around the store again but didn't say anything else. Then she went with her companion to the lower floor. My colleague saw them to the door. They were not even in the store for five minutes.' 

She emphatically denied ever saying to Winfrey: 'You don't want to see this bag. It is too expensive.  You cannot afford it.'

The saleslady went on: 'This is not true. This is absurd. I would never say something like that to a customer. Really never. Good manners and politeness are the Alpha and the Omega in this business. 

'I don't know why she is making these accusations. She is so powerful and I am just a shop girl.   

'I didn't hurt anyone. I don't know why someone as great as her must cannibalize me on TV.   ...

'I didn't know who she was when she came into the store. That wouldn't have made any difference if I had."

Sounds like the clerk didn't want to go through the trouble of getting down a ridiculously overpriced bag that almost nobody ever buys, compounded with the sin of Not Recognizing Oprah.

If the clerk is telling the truth, Oprah is putting words in her mouth. On the other hand, the clerk doesn't claim to have gotten down the bag, so it's likely that something in her manner discouraged Oprah, who is not the world's most easily discourageable person. 

It's also possible that the clerk was unenthusiastic about going the extra mile for Oprah not because she is black, but because she is fat. Oprah has some of the world's best makeup and lighting people working for her, so she normally looks fine on TV and on the cover of her O magazine, but when she's too rushed for the full treatment, she definitely doesn't look like she can afford a $38,000 handbag. (My guess is that Zurich boutiques do occasionally see black women who can afford such things, typically the wives of African dictators in town to visit their money at their Swiss banks.)

At ultra-high end luxury boutiques, the greatest sin is Shopping While Fat. Handbags that cost $38,000 are bought, I would guess, almost exclusively by Social X-Rays, who look upon shopping alongside fat people as potentially contagious, in terms of social status and perhaps even biologically. Thus, shop clerks frequently give the cold shoulder to the fat to encourage them out the door.

But being prejudiced against the fat is a far frontier that will have to wait its turn for condemnation until after all the last bunkers of prejudice against gays and transgenders are finally routed. (And of course, the most virulently prejudiced against the fat are gay men, so it will require some tricky spinning to avoid mentioning that.)

For Oprah's self-esteem, being the victim of Shopping While Black is much better than being the victim of Shopping While Fat. In the U.S., she enjoys 100% facial recognition among the kind of people who work in boutiques, so here nobody ever does anything other than pander to her every wish. But in Europe, she's not all that widely known, so she occasionally gets treated like other 200-pound women get treated at luxury goods stores.

Read More

World War G

When I recall the Cold War, I think:

- I'm glad we won

- And I'm glad it's over

But, apparently, lots of people look forward to another ideological struggle with Russia, this time over Russia's recent law restricting the dissemination of "gay propaganda" among children. The New York Times is particularly offended, what with gay propaganda comprising so much of its daily output. Thus, with zero sense of irony, the NYT's two top World stories tonight are:

World » 

Gays In Russia Find No Haven, Despite Support From The West 

Tell Us About Your Experiences Being Gay In Russia / Быть Геем В России: Расскажите О Вашем Личном Опыте

Read More

Schumer: House GOP bumbling into my hands

Via The Z Man, a story from Breitbart:

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), a member of the Senate's Gang of Eight, told CNN on Wednesday that he thinks the House GOP’s plan to approach immigration reform through piecemeal legislation is acceptable since the bills will simply be combined in conference. 

“We would much prefer a big comprehensive bill but any way that the House can get there is okay by us,” Schumer said. “I actually am optimistic that we will get this done. I’ve had a lot of discussions with members of both parties in the House. Things are moving in the right direction.” 

Schumer said House Republicans now appear more open than ever to granting amnesty to illegal aliens, and are going to use the strategy of passing a large group of bills addressing specific immigration issues to get to a conference with the Senate bill. “My initial reaction was the House wasn’t going to take up any bill,” Schumer said. “That would have been very bad, no bill. Now they’re doing it in pieces.”

The problem with conspiracy theorists is that they don't notice the giant conspiracies that really exist, the ones where the brains behind the operation go on CNN to explain the mistakes the opposition (such as it is) are making.

Read More

A Confederacy of Douches

Speaking of giant conspiracies hiding in plain view, from the Los Angeles Times:

Immigration reform creates odd political alliances 

Liberal organizations are working alongside GOP operatives, faith groups and high-tech companies to sway Republicans in Congress to overhaul immigration policies. And a lot of money is being spent to do so. 

By Brian Bennett and Joseph Tanfani 

WASHINGTON — When television ads aired in South Carolina this spring attacking Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham for supporting immigration reform, a GOP group came to his aid. So did the other team. 

"We came up with the money," said Frank Sharry, founder and executive director of America's Voice, a Washington-based group with close ties to the Obama White House. "We were just frustrated that nobody was doing anything, and Graham was under attack. We said, 'Fine, we will put money in.'" 

Sharry's group, knowing an ad sponsored by a left-leaning advocacy group could hurt Graham, donated $60,000 to Republicans for Immigration Reform, a super PAC started by President George W. Bush's former Commerce secretary, Carlos Gutierrez, and GOP fundraiser Charlie Spies. 

An unprecedented collection of political bedfellows has coalesced this year on the reform side of the immigration debate: liberal Latino organizations and Republican operatives, the Chamber of Commerce and labor unions, faith groups and high-tech companies. And as with the Sharry contribution, some left-leaning groups are financing Republican pro-immigration groups. 

The result is a flood of money for advertising, lobbying and field organizing aimed at convincing Republicans in Congress to create a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally, authorize more temporary work visas and increase security on the border with Mexico. 

During the first half of the year, reform backers outspent opponents in advertising by more than 3 to 1: $2.4 million to $700,000, according to Kantar Media's Campaign Media Analysis Group. They also hired a battalion of lobbyists. In the second quarter, 527 businesses, advocacy groups and others reported lobbying on immigration, up from 389 in the first three months of the year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. 

Some of that spending is about to show up in targeted campaigns in House districts. Advocates are trying to keep up the pressure when members are home during the five-week August recess — or "Action August," as President Obama called it last month. But the biggest spending is likely to come this fall, when the House is expected to take up a series of immigration bills. 

"We will see a significant ramp-up of activities in August and September," said Tom Snyder, who runs the campaign effort for the labor giant AFL-CIO. Some Republican House members have already started to soften their opposition to reform, he said, especially in districts with tens of thousands of union members. "What you are seeing is not an avalanche but a stream starting to trickle in our direction." 

The last time Congress took up the issue, in 2007, anti-immigration groups mounted a fierce grass-roots campaign and succeeded in defining the bill as "amnesty" for lawbreakers. This time, advocates have launched a preemptive strike. 

"I've heard it said, it could be lost in August but not won in August," said Spies, a lawyer who formed Republicans for Immigration Reform to provide "political cover." 

The AFL-CIO has spent $418,998 to run ads in at least six states and plans to spend more than $1 million in August and September targeting 40 Republicans in the House. The Service Employees International Union started a $200,000 radio campaign aimed at Republican congressmen in 10 districts with growing Latino populations, including four Californians: Jeff Denham (Atwater), Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (Santa Clarita), Gary G. Miller (Diamond Bar) and David Valadao (Hanford). 

Two moderate Republican organizations also have participated. The American Action Network spent $182,085 on television ads, and Americans for a Conservative Direction spent $105,251 for ads in six states, according to Kantar Media. 

FWD.us, an advocacy group founded by Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and funded by top tech executives, announced plans last week to spend more than $500,000 on ads featuring a young Chicago man who wants to become a Marine but can't because he came to the country illegally as a 7-month-old. 

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which opposes boosting immigration levels, said his side was badly outgunned. The tide of corporate money has moved the debate away from the promise of the poem on the Statue of Liberty to welcome the tired, the poor and the freedom-seekers, he said. 

"Now, it's give us your industrial and farm workers who are low-wage and poorly educated, or give us the technical talent from somebody else's economy," Stein said. 

The immigration debate has drawn attention, and money, from a vast array of businesses: notably the tech industry, which wants more H-1B visas for highly trained foreign workers, but also other industries that rely heavily on immigrant labor, including agriculture and hotels. Since March, companies and trade groups signed up 76 more lobbying firms, according to the Sunlight Foundation and the Center for Responsive Politics. 

Microsoft Corp. has been among the most active. In addition to its in-house lobbying operation, the company has paid lobbyists from 15 firms this year to press the case on Capitol Hill. 

Fred Humphries, vice president for government affairs, said Microsoft supported reform efforts that would increase high-tech visas because U.S. colleges do not graduate enough computer scientists. "In the U.S. today, Microsoft has approximately 3,500 research and engineering jobs we can't fill," he said. 

The business lobby's influence on Republican lawmakers was on vivid display this spring. In March, Utah's Republican senators, Orrin G. Hatch and Mike Lee, urged the Senate to slow down on immigration reform. That didn't sit well at the Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce, where many members had been agitating to increase high-tech visas. At a news conference, the chamber's president threatened to mount a recall of Hatch and Lee. 

Hatch soon changed course. He became a key player in the talks that led the Senate to approve a bipartisan bill authorizing up to 180,000 high-tech visas — nearly triple the current number. 

The business spending has been welcomed by immigration advocates. 

"For the first time, I am seeing business actually put political muscle into this campaign. In the past, it was more like lip service," said Eliseo Medina, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union and a key strategist for the immigration reform forces. 

One congressman who has felt the squeeze is Rep. Mike Coffman, a Colorado Republican elected in 2008 in the district once represented by the vociferously anti-immigration Tom Tancredo. In 2012, the district was redrawn to include Aurora, one of the most immigrant-dense cities in the state. 

Among the pro-reform groups lobbying Coffman were evangelical church members, part of a grass-roots effort financed by Zuckerberg's FWD.us, a Christian family foundation and a hedge-fund manager who is a major Republican donor. 

"That has never happened before," said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which was the conduit for the money. Noorani's organization typically draws financial support from progressives. 

During the Senate debate this spring, Coffman's Colorado office was deluged with calls and petitions, said Dustin Zvonek, his district director. Ten days in a row, evangelical churchgoers held prayer vigils in the office. 

Coffman endorsed comprehensive reform last month. 

That decision brought him $275,000 worth of positive TV commercials from Americans for a Conservative Direction — also funded by FWD.us. "On immigration, too many members of Congress argue with each other, but our congressman, Mike Coffman, listened to us," the ad said. 

* The post's title, suggested by a commenter recently, is of course a play on the the classic comic novel by John Kennedy Toole, A Confederacy of Dunces, which is derived from Swift's line, "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Read More

Open Borders boys get what they're asking for, good and hard

Over at the Open Borders logo contest on Facebook, the organizers have had to close their borders because all the cleverest logos were being submitted by satirists. It's almost as if human beings are happier when their communities are allowed to regulate who is allowed in ...

Here's a recent entry that was, apparently, sincere enough to avoid being deported.

Bryan Caplan 

I think it would be really cool if someone could incorporate the familiar hue and texture of a green traffic light into the design. It's the international symbol of "You're free to go," after all.

Alexandria Fraga 

Gave the traffic light suggestion a shot. 

Or, then again, this may be yet another reductio ad absurdum -- Let's use Open Borders to spread Mexico City-style driving to the whole world! -- that the Open Borders boys are too naive to notice.

Another subversive Open Borders logo that hasn't yet been rounded up by La Migra and kicked out of the contest page due to the sponsors' terminal unworldliness is:

Trust me, you do not want to look up the photographic original for this adaptation of a disgusting meme.

Previous (intentionally or unintentionally) ironic Open Borders logos are archived here.

Read More