Answering the Mail

by Ramesh Ponnuru

It has been a while since I have cleared out the inbox, so here goes.

First, an email that was probably in response to this tv appearance:

I think it’s sad that you are against immigration. The Ponnuru’s didn’t come here on the Mayflower.

Let me see if I’m following this. Because my family didn’t come here on the Mayflower, I can’t think it’s a mistake to double immigration levels over the next decade? Would it be ok to object to tripling? Quadrupling? Or do I just have to be for open borders? Also, if it is particularly egregious for me to take this position I take it that you would find the same position, coming from a descendant of Puritan stock, more acceptable? Isn’t there a word for that kind of thing? And should I also take it that anyone, of whatever ancestry, is allowed to take your position on the immigration bill? Isn’t that rather convenient?

Another email:

Really admire your pro-life work, just wondering if you could help me out. I was arguing about this with a friend and he stumped me by asking who I’d save in a burning building: some embryos or adults? I didn’t have a really good answer and thought you might?

You don’t need an answer. Just say that whoever you choose to save, you’re pretty sure it would be wrong to kill any of adults or human embryos on your way out the door.

In response to this column, on the disappointing beginning of Obama’s second term:

would you shut up! eat some curry

Is that supposed to be a slam? Curry is often delicious.

In February I wrote a post pointing out that Romney ran ahead of most Republican Senate candidates; I had suggested earlier that as flawed a candidate as Romney was, he didn’t drag down his party but was instead dragged down by it. That drew this response:

I think this is an unfair comparison. Don’t presidential candidates usually run ahead of their tickets? 

Well, Obama didn’t in those states. I asked my AEI colleague Marguerite Gilles to look at the races in 1964, when Barry Goldwater is generally considered to have been an anchor on his party’s fortunes. He underperformed the Senate candidates in 26 of 33 races.

Last one for now (I may try to do more later), in response presumably to this article:

At this point, after the Supreme Court has already let the law stay and Obama has won re-election, isn’t it beginning to border on treason to keep fighting the [health-care law]?


The Corner

The one and only.