Hubert Collins, American Renaissance, June 27, 2016

The Center for American Progress (CAP) is the most important think tank on the Left–a sort of foil to the Heritage Foundation–and is a strong influence on the Obama administration. Recently CAP held two events that clearly show what non-white activists and domesticated whites think about the United States and its founding stock.

At a June 20 panel called United States v. Texas: Will the U.S. Supreme Court Decision Echo in November?, the keynote speaker was Jose Antonio Vargas. Mr. Vargas is an open homosexual and illegal immigrant from the Philippines who makes a living denouncing the wicked ways of the nation of which he apparently wants to be a citizen. He runs “Define American,” an illegal-immigrant advocacy group, and slams white people, as in the MTV documentary “White People” and the 2012 Time magazine cover story “We Are Americans.”

Joining Mr. Vargas were Mee Moua, President of Asian Americans Advancing Justice; Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the pro-amnesty National Immigration Law Center; and Mario Carrillo, communications director of Voto Latino. All four speakers were non-white, and the white CAP employee Angela Kelley who introduced them said it was CAP’s first “all-immigrant” panel, and that as a native American, she loved being the outlier.

The event took place a few days before the Supreme Court blocked President Obama’s executive amnesty, and each panelist talked about how the case relates to the presidential election. All expected executive amnesty to go through, and all thought this boded well for November. Maybe they are feeling less confident now, but at the time of the panel they were full of leftist smugness and myopia.

Thus spake Jose Vargas:

I will not underestimate the level of anxiety, anger, insecurity, of a lot of lower middle class, middle class, white voters all across this country. Think about it, this country is only going to get gayer, right, more gay people will come out. Gayer, blacker, browner, more Asian, [laughter] right? Gayer, blacker, browner, more Asian. Women, of all backgrounds, will break every barrier there is to break. What’s at stake in the election? In some ways what’s at stake is how much change can white heterosexual men handle? Clearly if you’re Donald Trump, a lot. . . . If I had one wish man, I would wish every undocumented immigrant in this country got a citizen and said “Please vote, because I can’t.” Right? If we could do that, that would be awesome. We cannot underestimate the level of anxiety, and just, you know . . . fear, you know?

Miss Hincapié eagerly added, “Completely agree.”

Mr. Carrillo noted triumphantly: “You’re [Mr. Trump] relying on an electorate that is continually shrinking, okay, and I know that there’s going to be a lot of white anger that might lead to a higher voter turnout among the white community, but it’s still a shrinking electorate, and that cannot be denied.”

That a prominent Washington think tank should invite professional non-white agitators publicly to look forward to the replacement of white people is not as shocking as it would have been a few years ago, but it is still infuriating.

The other topics were what you would expect: blacks and Hispanics need to work together, non-whites must be encouraged to vote, Hispanic voter turnout will break all prior records, labor unions need to be strengthened, Asians should speak up more in defense of other non-whites, etc. More surprising were attacks on the media, which they suspected of being in alliance with Donald Trump. Mr. Vargas said:

I actually have to wonder, when you have news organizations like the Washington Post and the New York Times still using the word ‘illegal’ to refer to people, are they actually intentionally siding with Donald Trump? That’s a question I would love to ask every editor who works in newsrooms across the US. When we look back 30, 40, years from now, I think, unmistakably, the media will bear the brunt of the blame.

Later he noted that the “ethnic presses” did not seem so biased in favor of Mr. Trump. Needless to say, the Post and the Times–including their token “conservatives”–have been relentlessly anti-Trump. David Brooks of the Times is the author of “No, Not Trump, Not Ever,” and Robert Kagan of the Post calls Mr. Trump a fascist. But little of what the panelists said would withstand scrutiny. Despite their claims of black-brown-union solidarity, blacks and Hispanics often fight each other, many union members are backing Mr. Trump, and Asians view blacks much the same way whites do.

The June 16 panel, A Look at How Refugees are Integrating in the United States, was equally detached from reality. It included the mayor of Fargo, North Dakota, Tim Mahoney, who is clearly a “good white.” He claimed that refugees in his town are just as patriotic as everyone else, and explained that Muslims are no different from Lutherans. He is very proud to be overseeing a rapid increase in the diversity of Fargo.

He did not mention that in 1999, his sleepy town had a violent crime rate that was just 30 percent the national average, but that in 2013, for the first time since records have been kept, Fargo exceeded the national average of violent crime per capita. Mayor Mahoney also failed to mention the heroin crisis in his city that his own police attribute to Mexican cartels. The county has just formed its first ever “Metro Street Crimes Unit.”

Panelist Sussan Khozouri, vice president of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, told heart-warming stories about all those Americans who arrived at Ellis Island so long ago. Another panelist, Augustin Ntabaganyimana, the director of the Maryland Office for Refugees and Asylees, spoke (with an accent) about how so many refugees are learning English. He regaled the audience with anecdotes about his journey to the United States from Africa, getting laughs when he said such things as, “I learned to drink iced coffee.” Another panelist cited figures showing that refugees are making good economic progress.

The two CAP events complimented each other nicely. The refugee panel was composed of technocrats and government officials who assured us that refugees are fitting in marvelously. This was their message: America is so great, its origins so beautiful, and its history so powerful, that all who arrive here will be absorbed and taken in by it–which is a glorious thing. There was none of the Left’s typical deconstructionist, anti-tradition smirking.

The panel on US vs Texas was completely different. It was all angry immigrants attacking the native media for not being sufficiently supportive, attacking whites for opposing their own dispossession, and attacking Donald Trump. But both events were held by the same organization, in a perfect example of the Left’s double game. First they say immigrants should come here because America is wonderful and anyone can become a good American. Then they say they can’t wait for immigrants to replace those ugly Americans.

Gregory Hood wrote recently about the same contradiction. While Hillary Clinton and the largely white-run Democratic Party sell hats that say “America is Already Great,” her black detractors sell hats that say “America Was Never Great.” Hispanics who protest Mr. Trump wear clothes that reads “Make America Brown Again” and “Make America Mexico Again.”

Leftists don’t want immigrants to assimilate into a country they despise. No bureaucrat at the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society will criticize Jose Antonio Vargas for making assimilation harder by stirring up anti-American sentiments. No government employee who works to resettle refugees will complain about ethnic advocacy groups that try to get non-whites to vote as a bloc. No one will object when non-whites gloat over the end of white America.

No matter what the Left says about patriotic immigrants assimilating to the American way, if you want to know the Left’s true intentions, just watch the video of the panel on US vs Texas and listen to the panelists’ contempt for this country and its people.