Ezra Klein: This Post Made Me Hungry

« The American Assimilation Set | Main | Simple Answers to Simple Journalism Questions »

June 18, 2007

This Post Made Me Hungry

Speaking of Mexican assimilation, Brian's right: If you live in the district, run, don't walk, to Pollo Sabroso, the first decent taco joint I've found in DC. The market, it turns out, forces assimilation in all sorts of odd directions, and to my great relief, is pushing what was once a terrific Salvadorean chicken place (try the yucca fries) into "Mexican-style tacos." This is welcome. Despite Mt. Pleasant's concentration of Hispanics, it's actually sorely lacking in tacos -- the cuisine tends towards pupusas. The arrival of delicious warmed tortillas filled with your choice grilled meats (I recommend the tongue) is pretty clear evidence that our cultures can not only live in peace, but that they must. It's hard, however, to ignore the fact that these tacos only came on the market as the immigration debate heated up, and so are probably some nefarious plot by the Aztlan movement to increase pro-immigrant sentiment among those living in the Capitol. The way to a man's Congress is through his stomach, or something.

Putting aside the restaurant's chief virtues of Being Delicious and Being Cheap, it's also ideologically useful. The family that runs the place speaks, at best, mediocre English, and comprehension can be a problem. That's why it's always nice when their kids are wandering about the place, as they'll walk up behind you, observe their parents trying to comprehend your order, and finally offer an exasperated "he wants the hot sauce, mama, the hot sauce." This will then be translated into Spanish, and you'll then get the hot sauce, which appears to be made on-site and is also, for those wondering, delicious, and all the more so because you acquired it through the Power of Assimilation.

June 18, 2007 | Permalink

Comments

Interesting post. Read my blog!

Posted by: Wido Incognitus | Jun 18, 2007 5:26:40 AM

Of course, since it is in DC, the probablity of the kids even graduating High school are about 1 in 3 and the probability that they will be able to read and write English above the 6th grade level will be much less.

Since the kids are in DC there is a good probablity that the will join a gang, drop out of school and that the daughter will be pregnant well before her 18th birthday.

I guess the cheap tacos make up from the super high taxes in DC, the high crimes, the horrible levels of learning in the schools, and that most of the hospitals are losing money because their ER are overwhelmed.

Posted by: superdestroyer | Jun 18, 2007 7:27:12 AM

Try "El Paraiso"--where absolutely no one speaks English--at 14th and Randolph NW; Columbia Heights, not Mt. Pleasant, has the best Mexican in the city.

I'd also like to see the assimilation argument argued out further. I'm not sure that having fifteen or so percent of the population firmly encased in their respective cultural communities is such a threat to the long-term well-being of the country. It seems to me that, since we're so geographically isolated, we benefit from having the type of diversity where we encounter different cultures on their own terms rather than as an unholy amalgamation of the original cultures with what Americans find most acceptable in them (since the post is food-related, I cite the monstrosity of Pan-Asian cuisine). Then again, I can't help but notice that most of the individuals I know making the anti-assimilation argument tend to be the most thoroughly assimilated themselves.

Posted by: VasyaDC | Jun 18, 2007 8:40:48 AM

Superdestroyer is right: the high crimes are really ruining DC. Luckily, there's a Constitutional solution for that exact problem.

Posted by: Mikey | Jun 18, 2007 9:29:26 AM

There really is no reasoning with Ezra on immigration. He loves his Taco's Dammit, and there's nothing that's going to keep him from getting them...

Posted by: soullite | Jun 18, 2007 10:04:24 AM

What about Burrito Fast? They have tacos. But Pollo Sabroso is indeed great in general, so I'll have to walk the extra half-block and try it out.

There's actually another Pollo Sabroso opening somewhat soon on the 1400 block of Park; I think it's the same owners, although "Delicious Chicken" isn't exactly an exclusive branded term. This shows clever foresight, as that piece of real estate is going to be much more valuable in a year once all those condos start getting actual residents. Then, perhaps, the owners of Pollo Sabroso can move to a nice house in the suburbs.

Posted by: SDM | Jun 18, 2007 10:18:20 AM

Couldn't Ezra get his yummy meals - as well as his sense of smug self-satisfaction - with a limited amount of immigration from a wide variety of countries just as well? Should we support massive immigration of various kinds largely from Mexico so Ezra can feel all good about himself? Should we give the MexicanGovernment even more PoliticalPower inside the U.S.* so Ezra can have a taco?

* Minor case in point: a pro-amnesty Blogad bearing a quote from Ezra used to run on this site; it was sponsored by a coalition that included one group that had allegedly collaborated with the MexicanGovernment and another headed by someone linked to that government. Another member organization is partly funded by the IrishGovernment.

Posted by: TLB | Jun 18, 2007 11:21:54 AM

TLB: sabroso isn't run by mexicans, and you're an ass.

Posted by: cyates | Jun 18, 2007 11:26:38 AM

Also, the Wikipedia page linked to contains this interesting claim:

"For example the name Aztlán was taken up by some revolutionary Chicano movement activists of the 1960s and 1970s to refer to the Southwestern United States which was stolen from Mexico by the United States as a result of the Mexican-American War."

The claim that it was "stolen" was added five days ago. Who knew history could change so rapidly! Either that, or people really shoudn't link to that site.

Posted by: TLB | Jun 18, 2007 11:28:09 AM

The claim that it was "stolen" was added five days ago. Who knew history could change so rapidly!

Not so rapidsly:

Generally the officers of the army were indifferent whether the annexation [of Texas] was consummated or not; but not so all of them. For myself, I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day regard the war [with Mexico] which resulted as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory.--U. S. Grant

That originally having some strong motive—what, I will not stop now to give my opinion concerning—to involve the two countries in a war, and trusting to escape scrutiny, by fixing the public gaze upon the exceeding brightness of military glory—that attractive rainbow, that rises in showers of blood—that serpent’s eye, that charms to destroy he plunged into it, and has swept, on and on, till, disappointed in his calculation of the ease with which Mexico might be subdued, he now finds himself, he knows not where. How like the half insane mumbling of a fever-dream, is the whole war part of his late message! At one time telling us that Mexico has nothing whatever, that we can get, but territory; at another, showing us how we can support the war, by levying contributions on Mexico. At one time, urging the national honor, the security of the future, the prevention of foreign interference, and even, the good of Mexico herself, as among the objects of the war; at another, telling us, that "to reject indemnity, by refusing to accept a cession of territory, would be to abandon all our just demands, and to wage the war, bearing all it’s expenses, without a purpose or definite object[.]" So then, the national honor, security of the future, and every thing but territorial inderrmity, may be considered the no-purposes, and indefinite, objects of the war! But, having it now settled that territorial indemnity is the only object, we are urged to seize, by legislation here, all that he was content to take, a few months ago, and the whole province of lower California to boot, and to still carry on the war—to take all we are fighting for, and still fight on. Again, the President is resolved, under all circumstances, to have full territorial indemnity for the expenses of the war; but he forgets to tell us how we are to get the excess, after those expenses shall have surpassed the value of the whole of the Mexican territory. So again, he insists that the separate national existence of Mexico, shall be maintained; but he does not tell us how this can be done, after we shall have taken all her territory. Lest the questions, I here suggest, be considered speculative merely, let me be indulged a moment in trying [to] show they are not. The war has gone on some twenty months; for the expenses of which, together with an inconsiderable old score, the President now claims about one half of the Mexican territory; and that, by far the better half, so far as concerns our ability to make any thing out of it. It is comparatively uninhabited; so that we could establish land offices in it, and raise some money in that way. But the other half is already inhabited, as I understand it, tolerably densely for the nature of the country; and all it’s lands, or all that are valuable, already appropriated as private property. How then are we to make any thing out of these lands with this encumbrance on them? or how, remove the encumbrance? I suppose no one will say we should kill the people, or drive them out, or make slaves of them, or even confiscate their property. How then can we make much out of this part of the territory? If the prossecution of the war has, in expenses, already equalled the better half of the country, how long it’s future prosecution, will be in equalling, the less valuable half, is not a speculative, but a practical question, pressing closely upon us. And yet it is a question which the President seems to never have thought of.--A. Lincoln

Posted by: rea | Jun 18, 2007 11:57:39 AM

For more on the political implications of pupusas, check out http://longislandwins.com/

Posted by: Self-interested | Jun 18, 2007 12:09:29 PM

Is tenderized-through-slow-cooking TLB-ass one of the meat choices for taco-filling at Pollo Sabroso?

(and why do wingnuts and assorted crazies obsess about which ads are present on blogs?)

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jun 18, 2007 12:48:55 PM

why do wingnuts and assorted crazies obsess about which ads are present on blogs?

Sometimes they get tired of all the usual irrelevant bullshit they obsess over, and so they look around for new stuff. It'll pass and they'll lay off the ads before long, wingnuts and assorted crazies are nothing if not creatures of habit.

Also, Ezra seems fairly aware that El Pollo Sabroso is Salvadorean; the "Mexican assimilation" bit comes from them starting to offer tacos in addition to their other stuff.

Probably, though, I don't mind having immigrants because I'm the descendant of illegals myself. After all, no one asked the Pilgrims to come over, and later on I suspect the Native Americans weren't too pleased when the whites decided that "Hey, Oklahoma looks pretty good after all."

Posted by: Stephen | Jun 18, 2007 2:45:36 PM

When that blogad appeared on Ezra's site, it almost certainly had to have been approved by him. And, it bore a quote from him and a link to an article he wrote. It's safe to assume that at the least he didn't object to them quoting him, and I consider it a form of endorsement. Now, the reader should compare that to what's written above.

And, of course, one sees the far-left's continual inability to support U.S. laws and sovereignty in the last comment, as well as the notion that something is wrong when one group does it but not wrong when some other group does it. And, of course, the conflation of "immigration" with the current situation of massive immigration largely from one country and with a significant portion being illegal.

Posted by: TLB | Jun 18, 2007 3:04:14 PM

I consider it a form of endorsement.

So what? That's not a valid basis for criticism. You're apparently unaware of the way advertising functions in journalism, where newspapers and magazines routinely take stands that contradict the interests of entities that advertise in their publications.

That's incoherent. It's utter nonsense, probably because you're responding to a conversation in your head rather than what I wrote.

Nor does the proportion of Mexican citizens among our immigrants, legal or illegal, matter one bit. Mexico is a large country, with residents of Chiapas having little in common with people from Chihuahua, especially when you start to get into different ethnicities. Some Mexican immigrants don't speak Spanish all that well. Many of them are already bilingual, speaking Spanish as well as an Indian dialect. Your fears of some homogeneous group of invaders are unfounded.

It's also funny how you want to throw out this nation's history. You might not be self-aware enough to see it, but those of us who take history seriously understand that the only reason to discount it is because it messes up your foregone conclusions.

Plus, your differences aren't even real. While the USA as a whole has never received a massive influx of immigrants from just one nation, several parts of the USA have, from the Chinese immigration into Northern California, Japanese immigration into Hawaii and Southern California, the Irish into New England, or for that matter the Spaniards into the entire hemisphere, or white Americans into the Mexican territory of what is now Texas.

Come to think of it, those last two examples might help prove your point that immigration is bad, bad, bad.

Posted by: Stephen | Jun 18, 2007 3:24:10 PM

I consider it a form of endorsement.

And I consider you a fuckwitted ladder-puller with an obsession about Mexicans rising up and taking your Cheetohs. Now go and whine to Michelle Malkin.

Posted by: pseudonymous in nc | Jun 18, 2007 4:49:16 PM

Yes, yes, in fact this post did make me hungry. Now if only I weren't on a diet...:(

Posted by: Adrock | Jun 18, 2007 5:36:30 PM

something is wrong when one group does it but not wrong when some other group does it

What like perjury is wrong when Bill Clinton does it, but not poor little Scoots Libby?

Posted by: dk | Jun 18, 2007 7:57:57 PM

托盘
 托盘
 钢托盘
 钢制托盘
 塑料托盘
 木托盘
 木制托盘
 纸托盘
 木塑托盘