Laura Ingraham really can't explain her 'racist' remark - Baltimore Post-ExaminerBaltimore Post-Examiner

Laura Ingraham really can’t explain her ‘racist’ remark

A flag with a confederate battle flag on one side and a swastika on the other is burned by anti-Unite the Right 2 protesters. (Mike Jordan/BPE)

A flag with a confederate battle flag on one side and a swastika on the other is burned by anti-Unite the Right 2 protesters. (Mike Jordan/BPE)

BALTIMORE – On behalf of America, let us all say welcome to brand new citizens Viktor and Amalija Knavs, formerly of Slovenia but now free to call the United States home despite all the nasty talk by their very own son-in-law about “chain migration,” and all this other nasty talk about “massive demographic changes” bemoaned by that noted philosopher Laura Ingraham on Fox News.

You heard about Ingraham’s remarks, right?

She’s insisting she had no racist intentions during her regular Fox program the other night. As a film on the screen behind her showed people scaling what looked like a giant border wall or slipping under a fence, she declared:

“It does seem that the America we know and love doesn’t exist anymore. Massive demographic changes have been foisted on the American people, and they’re changes that none of us ever voted for and most of us don’t like.”

When hit by a barrage of criticism – that the “demographic changes” line was code in a “white supremacist speech” – Ingraham denied she was intending any racial references in her immigration diatribe.

Oh, no?

Then which immigrants was she talking about?

Slovenians?

Because, last week, those Knavs out of Slovenia were the only other big news on the immigration front, mainly because of their famous son-in-law and his infamous anti-immigration tweets.

Was Ingraham saying America’s taking in too many Slovenians?

Was she saying America needs to establish tighter Slovenian quotients before we’re over-run by those such as the Knavs?

The Knavs took advantage of a process in U.S. immigration law that is generally known as family-based immigration but is more commonly referred to by their unhappy son-in-law as “chain migration.”

Their son-in-law is, of course, President Donald Trump, and he has repeatedly railed against this “chain migration” procedure, in which American citizens can reach out and obtain residency for their relatives who wish to come here.

This is precisely the way Melania Trump reached out – how fortunate to know people in high places – and obtained residency for her parents, who last week took the final step since arriving here and became American citizens.

This happened despite such “chain migration” language uttered by Melania’s husband as his tweet last November.

“CHAIN MIGRATION must end now!” the president declared. “Some people come in, and they bring their whole family with them, who can be truly evil. NOT ACCEPTABLE.”

As anyone can see, this has the mark of hypocrisy all over it – Trump saying the process is no good for thousands of people hungry for citizenship, but just fine as long as they’re related to someone who happens to be married to the president.

Let’s assume Trump didn’t secretly have his Slovenian in-laws in mind when he was criticizing the “chain reaction” process.

Most likely he wasn’t since Slovenians have that one big advantage over most of the immigrants Trump has coincidentally found so unfitting for entrance into the U.S. – their skin color.

Just as the people in the film depicted behind Ingraham, desperate to get over a wall or to dig beneath a fence – are mostly dark-skinned, so Trump has ranted against those from south of the U.S. border who happen to have brown skin.

Washington DC, Aug. 12, 2012: Anti-Unite the Right 2 protesters ignite a flag at 15th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. (Mike Jordan/BPE)

Anti-Unite the Right 2 protesters ignite a flag at 15th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. (Mike Jordan/BPE)

And how ironic that such a discussion arrives on the one-year anniversary of that other great issue involving race – and religion – the one-year anniversary of the march in Charlottesville against such minorities as Jews and African-Americans.

This was supposed to be re-enacted over the weekend in Washington.

It was, thankfully, a thoroughly pathetic turnout by the racists, some wearing Make America Great Again caps, who were completely out-numbered by anti-bigot protesters.

Many will recall the aftermath of the Charlottesville rally when President Trump failed to distinguish between racists and anti-Semites on one side, and those protesting the bigots on the other side.

The protesters this time, though small in number, were still ranting against blacks and Jews.

As far as we know, they had nothing to say about Slovenians.

 


About the author

Michael Olesker

Michael Olesker, columnist for the News American, Baltimore Sun, and Baltimore Examiner has spent a quarter of a century writing about the city he loves.He is the author of five previous books, including Michael Olesker's Baltimore: If You Live Here, You're Home, Journeys to the Heart of Baltimore, and The Colts' Baltimore: A City and Its Love Affair in the 1950s, all published by Johns Hopkins. Contact the author.
COMMENT POLICY

HOME / ABOUT / CONTACT / JOIN THE TEAM / TERMS OF SERVICE / PRIVACY POLICY / COMMENT POLICY