No, I don’t mean I’m disappointed that the reviews of my book aren’t uniformly laudatory. While David Frum, for instance, liked the book, Peter Wehner didn’t. But they both read the book and addressed its central premise — that what has changed from the Ellis Island era is not the immigrants but us, meaning that mass immigration is incompatible with modern society. But yesterday’s Washington Times review, by the D.C. correspondent for Credit Union Times, was unworthy even of a high-school newspaper — it didn’t even mention the book’s theme and instead simply strung together a series of bromides and cliches. The reviewer even recoiled from my use of the term “illegal alien” and was actually shocked at the very discussion Muslim profiling (which I rejected, BTW). I suspect the review was intended as a counterpoint to the first review in the Times, by retired economist Al Tella, who liked the book. But you’d think in a town full of business lobbyists and libertarian wonks, they could have come up with a better critic than this.