Where we are Frum

This [1] from David Frum, of National Review and the American Enterprise Institute, is the most explicit argument I've seen in some time on the part of a "respected" conservative that only white people count as Americans.

Maybe you've heard about the recent polls showing a huge Democratic
advantage among young voters. The latest , conducted by Stanley
Greenberg for the Democracy Project, shows (among other dismal
tidings) a 19-point party identification lead for Democrats among
voters younger than 30.

"Young people react with hostility to the Republicans on almost every
measure and Republicans and younger voters disagree on almost every
major issue of the day. The range of the issue disagreements range
from the most prominent issues of the day (Iraq, immigration) to
burning social issues (gay marriage, abortion) to fundamental
ideological disagreements over the size and scope of government."

Read the report in full, however, and you come across an interesting
nugget on page 6: White young people continue to favor Republicans by
a thin but real margin of 2 points. The Democrats owe their advantage
among youth to a huge lead among young African-Americans (78 points) -
and a very large lead (43 points) among Hispanics.

Check out the claim with which he concludes:

If Republicans face an inhospitable future
after 2008, we will hear much of the dreadful legacy of George W. Bush
on social issues, the war, the environment, etc. But Greenberg's own
work makes clear that these issues matter relatively little.... No, the legacy that will damage his party is the legacy of immigration
non-enforcement. This has imported a large new community of people who
are both economically struggling (and thus open to Democratic
arguments) but who lack deep attachment to the American nation (and
who are thus immune to the most potent of Republican appeals). It is
these voters who will sway elections in future. And thanks to this
president's immigration policies, there are going to be a lot more of
them than there might otherwise have been.

Is he saying that Mexicans who go through a period of naturalization of nearly a decade ("Currently, the median number of years of U.S. residence between legal immigration and naturalization is around eight years" [2]) [UPDATE: or, as digby [3] points out, who were born here] "lack deep attachment to the American nation"? I invite Frum, with whom I've had friendly exchanges in the past, to answer me this question: how is your argument different from that of the 1920s nativists, including the Ku Klux Klan, who argued that my Jewish ancestors who became naturalized citizens–as well as Catholics from Eastern Europe—likewise couldn't possibly develop a deep attachment to the American nation.

I don't think there's any way he can answer.