Illegal Hispanic immigration is undermining American values

[stu2002]

Illegal immigration is causing an influx of Hispanics who don't embrace American values.

By Walter Rodgers
posted March 30, 2010 at 11:07 am EDT
Santa Barbara, Calif. —

Walking the sandy beachfront in this ultra-affluent city, I chanced upon two Hispanic men rummaging through the trash. Startled at the sight, I stared momentarily. One of them yelled at me, “You look now, but in 50 years we will own all this!” Given the tsunami of illegal immigration and the prolific Hispanic birthrate, I responded, “I believe you will.”

US Census statistics suggest the scavenging man was right. California, now about 37 percent Latino, is expected to be majority Hispanic by 2042. A quarter of all Americans will probably be Latino in 40 years.

This trend has worrisome aspects. Imagine a huge, growing Hispanic underclass in America with a grudge, a burning sense of having been victimized by the “gringos.”

I witnessed this grudge up close a few years ago at Texas A&M International University in Laredo. Hispanic students challenged me, claiming any restriction of illegal immigration across the US southern border with Mexico is a violation of Latinos’ human rights.

Me: “Would you try to reenter Spain without a passport?

Students: “Of course not.”

Me: “What about France, or Britain?”

Students: “No.”

Yet many of these illegal Latino immigrants suffer the illusion they are divinely entitled to colonize the US – and not just the states bordering Mexico, but Chicago and the East Coast as well.

Some Hispanics talk openly of a reconquista, an effort to reclaim the American Southwest that once belonged to Mexico.

Historically, this concept is wide of the mark. Most Hispanic ancestors of immigrants owned no land. Their forebears were serfs of the Roman Catholic Church, once the largest landholder in Latin America and the world. Other ancestors labored as landless peons for Spanish colonial landlords who were later relieved of their lands by 19th-century Anglo-Americans.

Historical entitlement is but one of the myths surrounding illegal Hispanic immigration. Gringos have their own fables, such as ultimate assimilation into a greater English-speaking society.

Professor Lawrence Harrison of Tufts University in Medford, Mass., notes that “In California, fourth- and fifth-generation Mexican immigrants are still speaking only Spanish and resisting assimilation.” He says there are serious cultural barriers to the old melting-pot concept. “Words like compromise and dissent, crucial concepts to American democracy, have radically different meanings in Spanish.” Dissent, for example, translates into “heresy.”

Most alarming, today’s influx of poor Latin American immigrants comes from countries less than congenial to democracy, a law-based society, or public education. Many experts look with alarm on the fact that, unlike earlier European and Asian immigrants, the tsunami from the south too often undervalues educating children because many Hispanic parents resent the idea that their children will have more education than they have. In 2000, only 25 percent of working-age male Mexican immigrants had graduated high school, a sad fact that contributes to an increasingly volatile underclass.

Limited legal Latino immigration greatly enriches the United States. I’ve personally seen how Hispanic Americans bring tremendous loyalty and leadership qualities to our armed forces

But it is morally shameful to expect taxpayers to fund free education and medical care for lawbreakers so that the wealthiest Americans – restaurant owners, ranchers, agribusiness owners, and construction companies – can hire cheap labor regardless of the national consequences.

It is ever the wealthy sticking it to the poor. With so many Americans losing their homes and unable to find jobs, it is outrageous to say Hispanics still take jobs no one else will do.

Congress, which generally represents the wealthy, should begin by imposing huge fines on affluent Americans who hire illegals. Start with the millionaires in my neighborhood, who don’t mow their own lawns or baby-sit their children and instead hire immigrants who are almost certainly illegal.

Businessmen are bonkers if they think opening US borders to allow the free flow of uneducated labor will make America competitive with a burgeoning Chinese economy.

Naive American liberals need to stop trilling over Emma Lazarus’s “Give me your tired, your poor,/ Your huddled masses….” World population was 1.5 billion when she penned those lines. It now approaches 7 billion. America is not a dumping ground for the rest of the world’s surplus population.

Committing national suicide is not without precedent. The Dutch are rapidly losing their country. Before long, its largest cities will belong to Muslim immigrants. What then becomes of the liberal tradition of Erasmus and traditional Dutch tolerance?

Illegal immigration may ultimately be more threatening to the character and values of the US than any threat from radical Islamists. It’s not about tribe; it’s about the law.

Walter Rodgers, a former senior international correspondent for CNN, writes a biweekly column.


http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Walter-Rodgers/2010/0330/Illegal-Hispanic-immigration-is-undermining-American-values

[james1906]

Pretty spot on article.

[bobbyw24]

The writer used to be a former senior international correspondent for CNN??????

[Vessol]

Simple. Deport any non-Americans.

And by Americans, I mean original Americans.

Out with all the Europeans, Asians, Africans, South and Central Americans.

[stu2002]

Simple. Deport any non-Americans.

And by Americans, I mean original Americans.

Out with all the Europeans, Asians, Africans, South and Central Americans.

Are you an original American bro?

[Vessol]

Are you an original American bro?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MA6TSuti-Y8/SMxWnt96vzI/AAAAAAAABhg/G-n3emgd20M/s400/HomelandSecurity1492.jpg

[Noob]

There have been no American values since Disney Land and Disney World.

[stu2002]

Krazy Kaju is a liar and a thief.

Krazy Kaju copied material off of this page of my website[/url] and pasted it onto the Mises Institute website without citing his source.

Thief!

I demand that the Krazy Kaju credit all material lifted off of other people's websites and formally apologize for his thievery.



Liar!

I demand that Krazy Kaju retract this statement and formally apologize for telling lies.

I think people would rather read my controversial posts than this dude's rants that he has posted 10 times already.

[ChaosControl]

American values haven't existed in 50 years.

[Bman]

YouTube - south park-they took our jobs!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls)

[AlexMerced]

YouTube - south park-they took our jobs!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls)

lol, I am for open immigration (maybe just a basic background check and physical) but do away with all the quotas... we want more domestic consumers, it boosts our GDP lol, why have them spend in other countries and boosts their GDP, lol

all kidding aside, more people is fine, but the growing public center and control is not giving the economy the elasticity to respond to a growing population approrpiatly, the bottom line, free markets welcome everyone

[Vessol]

If we had a real free market it would adapt to new immigrants.

[wizardwatson]

Woops. Wasn't trying to post hear.

Native American pic hilarious though.

[AlexMerced]

If we had a real free market it would adapt to new immigrants.

he basically said what I said.. but more direct and straight to the point.

[silus]

That article blurs the line between illegal immigrants and legal Hispanic residents and even American citizens of Hispanic decent.


Historical entitlement is but one of the myths surrounding illegal Hispanic immigration.
This is a terrible argument simply because it suggests that Native Americans would be justified in trying to take over this country simply because they have a historical entitlement.

I've lived in California most of my life, and I can talk with first hand experience...I remember stopping at a supermarket in Socali to ask for directions and could NOT find anyone that spoke english. I have traveled and lived extensively around the world, and I believe whole heartedly in integration, and the idea that you can alleviate 99% of immigration concerns if you enter as a visitor and submit yourself to the ways of your environment. This has little to do with laws or governance but just how humans interact. And it burns me that immigrants, visitors in a country attempt to transplant/recreate their home environment in the land where they are still a visitor. THIS is what will guarantee you conflict.

Its no wonder the saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" has existed and been relevant for over 1600 years. Life is really not that complicated.

[BlackTerrel]

Walking the sandy beachfront in this ultra-affluent city, I chanced upon two Hispanic men rummaging through the trash. Startled at the sight, I stared momentarily. One of them yelled at me, “You look now, but in 50 years we will own all this!” Given the tsunami of illegal immigration and the prolific Hispanic birthrate, I responded, “I believe you will.”

I don't believe this story.

Stu do you ever post any non-race related threads?

[Lord Xar]

lol, I am for open immigration (maybe just a basic background check and physical) but do away with all the quotas... we want more domestic consumers, it boosts our GDP lol, why have them spend in other countries and boosts their GDP, lol

all kidding aside, more people is fine, but the growing public center and control is not giving the economy the elasticity to respond to a growing population approrpiatly, the bottom line, free markets welcome everyone

Oh brother. Give up the wannabe economics. With a game-plan like the one you just supplied, we'd be in in the poor house sooner than you think.

As is already proven, open borders is a complete recipe for disaster ---

[Pete_00]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MA6TSuti-Y8/SMxWnt96vzI/AAAAAAAABhg/G-n3emgd20M/s400/HomelandSecurity1492.jpg

I very much doubt you are a "real american" and that your bloodline remained "pure" during all this time.

And "real americans" were saints...never engaged in genocidal warfare against other "real americans" or anything like that...

[MelissaWV]

That article blurs the line between illegal immigrants and legal Hispanic residents and even American citizens of Hispanic decent.


This, to a very large extent.

The anecdote with which he started the article likely happened (I have no doubt it could, after all), but then again when I was first visiting the DC area to scope out a place to move, there was a darker-skinned bum who told my other to perform a sex act on him. He didn't ask, he told. I suppose I could have taken that experience and written an article on "female slave trafficking" and found statistics showing that it's darker-skinned people doing the trafficking.

Quotas are not a bad idea, by the way, but I believe the way they are written is the problem. The United States' quota system is based more on nation of origin than it is on economic possibility. Education, employment potential, ability to speak the predominant language, whether or not there are pre-existing ties to the community... those are great indicators of whether or not the person is going to be productive while they're in the country. An employer hiring an incoming immigrant should also have to demonstrate that they sought a citizen for the job, but could not find one. These aren't crazy ideas. They're based off of other countries' policies.

Finally, streamlining the entire process and cutting out a lot of the waiting and paperwork and stupidity would make things clearer and easier on everyone involved. I know for a fact we're currently preventing some very awesome people from coming into the country, but we're doing a piss poor job of keeping some very nasty people out.

[furface]

I'm looking forward to the US being turned into Mexico. In other words the elimination of the middle class. It's nice to have an abundance of eager peasants willing to work for slave wages at any menial job you don't want to do yourself. When they shoot at each other, I'll just lock the door of my compound and be entertained by the show.

[AlexMerced]

That article blurs the line between illegal immigrants and legal Hispanic residents and even American citizens of Hispanic decent.

This is a terrible argument simply because it suggests that Native Americans would be justified in trying to take over this country simply because they have a historical entitlement.

I've lived in California most of my life, and I can talk with first hand experience...I remember stopping at a supermarket in Socali to ask for directions and could NOT find anyone that spoke english. I have traveled and lived extensively around the world, and I believe whole heartedly in integration, and the idea that you can alleviate 99% of immigration concerns if you enter as a visitor and submit yourself to the ways of your environment. This has little to do with laws or governance but just how humans interact. And it burns me that immigrants, visitors in a country attempt to transplant/recreate their home environment in the land where they are still a visitor. THIS is what will guarantee you conflict.

Its no wonder the saying "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" has existed and been relevant for over 1600 years. Life is really not that complicated.


Isn't that essentially what happened with colonialism, we came and adapted our environment to us instead of vice versa? I agree we should adapt to our environment and not the other way around which the problem with big government. Although many countries around the world operate with small pockets of random communities that speak other language... but again to participate in the larger country/economy they would have to adapt.

Again, there is some reform neccessary but... we looking to address a symptom of a larger problem, not the problem itself

[bobbyw24]

Stu do you ever post any non-race related threads?

You know, BT, I was thinking the same thing. But I will say that Stu's race-based threads always get more views and replies than all of my Econ posts put together

[AlexMerced]

Oh brother. Give up the wannabe economics. With a game-plan like the one you just supplied, we'd be in in the poor house sooner than you think.

As is already proven, open borders is a complete recipe for disaster ---


Correlation is not causation, there are two main problems economically with the current state of immigration.

1) The Welfare State - due to having a welfare state citizens and non-citizens are becoming more and more a drain on taxpaying citizens and non-citizens... you have to dismantle the welfare system. The solution to this issue is a supply response, not a demand response. As long as there is a supply of government services, there will be a demand for it whether it's domestic or foreign. We must dismantle the supply of government services which taxpayers must pay for. Volunteered from private sources are encouraged and a not a drain on those who choose not to volunteer their limited resources. Also as far as immigration goes, these types of programs attract probably the wrong people. If you have no welfare system there is no incentive for anyone to immigrate unless it's to be productive and to have the opportunity to be productive.

2) Growing Public Sector, Shrinking Private Sector - Due to unions and a growing state the amount of public sector jobs have increased which have very rigid wages, they don't go down, and they always go up. This growing sector has consumed the amount of private sector jobs who have more elastic wages that can adjust to changes in the supply of labor and demand for the goods produced. Shrink the public sector, the private sector will grow enough and be vibrant enough to handle immigration. With the growth in labor there is a growth in demand for goods to offset it in a healthy free market economy.


In countries where open borders have had problematic effects have had large governments and small private sectors. Prosperous countries like Switzerland have multiple languages spoken. As far as assimilation, culture is constantly changing on a daily basis, so to argue that there is some constant standard of values, traditions that hasn't changed in perception or execution is an idealistic delusion. The beauty of humanity is how it's culture changes one generation to the next.

None of us talk with a 1920's accent or vocabulary or wear 60's attire (without a sense of novelty). The world is constantly changing faster and faster, you either diversify your outlook, knowledge and skills to adapt or get lost in the changes. It's in this diversity of culture, ideas, and values where innovation is conjured.

[AlexMerced]

YouTube - Taxation withouth Representation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3O-WeJ1J4I)

[BlackTerrel]

You know, BT, I was thinking the same thing. But I will say that Stu's race-based threads always get more views and replies than all of my Econ posts put together

I think most people are more likely to post on a thread when they disagree with the OP than when they agree. I know that's how I am. I don't post on 95% of threads, I post on the 5% of threads where I am more likely to voice a disagreement.

If there was a thread "Ron Paul is awesome" I wouldn't have much to add and would probably not even open it.

[stu2002]

I think most people are more likely to post on a thread when they disagree with the OP than when they agree. I know that's how I am. I don't post on 95% of threads, I post on the 5% of threads where I am more likely to voice a disagreement.

If there was a thread "Ron Paul is awesome" I wouldn't have much to add and would probably not even open it.

Food for thought

[fisharmor]

The thing that never gets discussed when illegal immigration gets brought up: How do we tell who's legal and who isn't?
I'm not talking about original residency or any of that... I'm talking logistics here.

If someone can think of another way to sort this out besides national ID cards and state officers who are entitled to ask for them at any time in any situation and arrest at will those who can not or will not comply, I'm all ears.

If any of you isn't scared to death at that thought, then I think you need to spend some time pondering where that really puts us.

If this were left to the free market, nothing would be done. The sad fact of the matter is that the one thing these people bring that can't be gotten rid of by the market is competition.

They compete for the jobs, they compete for housing, and they compete for the culture. Few of you anti-immigration folks really wants to compete, and few of you really want to do anything outside of state interference to try to fix the genuine problems they bring.

If you really want to do something that is within our power and will change the situation, then eliminate the welfare state. But you can not eliminate the competition. That is not only anti-liberty: it's also bad for society.


2) Growing Public Sector, Shrinking Private Sector

Ultimately, I think this is what is going to solve the immigration problem. Once things get horrible enough here, nobody will want to be here, let alone move here. Doesn't make sense to escape a place where the rule of law doesn't exist, only to move to another.

[MelissaWV]

fisharmor,

I think there are various levels to this. Of course, there's utter elimination of borders, which some advocate. At that point, people don't really need "papers."

There's elimination of incentives, which most of us favor, but there's a question of when (priorities) that's to take place. Without all the freebies, how many people would actually come to the US? It would probably make the immigrants skew more towards the poles: those who are destructive and criminal will come no matter what, because everything's a freebie to them; and those who are looking for opportunities and hard work will come, because they never really wanted freebies to begin with.

There's also the fact that, if we're to have a nation, we need to have a "proof of membership." The implication has always been that this should be in the form of a Social Security card/number, or a national ID card. Like everything else, start with narrowing the question. Here, it is "Who is a citizen?" Well, those who are born in the US or its territories (and they will have a birth certificate, of course, with their birth being on record at a hospital or with a midwife, or a certificate from the parents themselves attesting to the birth of their child and the circumstances surrounding it)... or those who come to the US legally (and they will receive some kind of proof that they have met whatever the requirements are for citizenship, either in the country or state or whatever form of "territory" exists in this hypothetical world). Those two categories would qualify as citizens, and people looking to "hire American" could ask for proof of citizenry.

I think the mire that people get into is the Government-mandated "papers please" nonsense. Everyone wants proof that you're yourself these days. SS is useless, and the cards are, too. Licenses are fine, if you're to be using public roads funded by taxes (again, whether there are even taxes depends on the rules of this hypothetical world), but not everyone drives. ID cards should be voluntary, and more of a shortcut. I think of them more like a business card, condensing your information and making it easier to fill out forms, show residency, and proof of identity on the rare occasion it's actually necessary (contracts, transactions, etc.).

Legality shouldn't really be much of an issue for living here. If it's to be an issue, it should be one at the level where the money is made. Think about it: if an "illegal" comes here, but a church decides to give them a place to stay, food, a small stipend for transportation... the money is being spent by the church within the US. If that family arrived with money of their own, even a little, they're putting it into our system, not their native nation's. However, if they are producing here, but shipping most of the money home, that could become an issue if it's being done on a large scale. It starves local economies to some extent. This could all very easily be done without the Government stepping in.

And yes, I know the documentation I mentioned could be forged. That's going to be a problem with anything, no matter how "high-tech" the solution.

[Dunedain]

YouTube - south park-they took our jobs!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls)

Posting racial name calling i see....How is "Angry White Redneck" different than "Uppity Black ******"?

[Dunedain]

The thing that never gets discussed when illegal immigration gets brought up: How do we tell who's legal and who isn't?
I'm not talking about original residency or any of that... I'm talking logistics here.

If someone can think of another way to sort this out besides national ID cards and state officers who are entitled to ask for them at any time in any situation and arrest at will those who can not or will not comply, I'm all ears.

If any of you isn't scared to death at that thought, then I think you need to spend some time pondering where that really puts us.

If this were left to the free market, nothing would be done. The sad fact of the matter is that the one thing these people bring that can't be gotten rid of by the market is competition.

They compete for the jobs, they compete for housing, and they compete for the culture. Few of you anti-immigration folks really wants to compete, and few of you really want to do anything outside of state interference to try to fix the genuine problems they bring.

If you really want to do something that is within our power and will change the situation, then eliminate the welfare state. But you can not eliminate the competition. That is not only anti-liberty: it's also bad for society.



Ultimately, I think this is what is going to solve the immigration problem. Once things get horrible enough here, nobody will want to be here, let alone move here. Doesn't make sense to escape a place where the rule of law doesn't exist, only to move to another.


Show them your birth certificate to prove you were born here. Like Obama doesn't

[Dunedain]

I think most people are more likely to post on a thread when they disagree with the OP than when they agree. I know that's how I am. I don't post on 95% of threads, I post on the 5% of threads where I am more likely to voice a disagreement.

If there was a thread "Ron Paul is awesome" I wouldn't have much to add and would probably not even open it.

i'll create an "I Love America" thread just for you to post in....lol!

[fisharmor]

Melissa -

Ok, I'm totally with you on this:

Legality shouldn't really be much of an issue for living here.

But as soon as we get there we're past the OP article's point. If legality isn't a matter of living here then we can toss out all that American Values nostalgia that people like to inject into this argument.

And yes, once you get rid of the incentives you're going to winnow the freeloaders from those who actually want to work. It sounds like you're talking mostly about the jobs now. What I'm saying is this: in order to come to a logical position on immigration, we need to fully comprehend the argument that "they're taking our jobs".

They are absolutely not taking our jobs - they are competing for our jobs, and they're winning. That's why the guys digging through the garbage said that they were going to own everything in 50 years, and why the author believed them.

When I see 18 year old white boys who already have callouses that allow them to randomly grab handfulls of drywall screws, and when I see young unmarried white women who are still living at home so that they can help with their parents' bills, and when I see two white families sharing the same house, and when I see white guys in line at 7-11, then I'll reconsider.

Until then, I reassert: underneath it all, when you strip away all the layers of argument, it's all about the unwanted competition of people who will accept market rates for jobs, and the desire to have the state remove that competition.

[MelissaWV]

I agree with you, fisharmor, I was just addressing your "how do we determine who's legal without national ID?" question.

There is always going to be a feeding frenzy over jobs with the least work for the most pay, and in low-wage terms, that doesn't mean picking fruit/veggies. I find it fascinating that people who would otherwise say "it's none of my business!" get so upset when it comes to the immigration issue.

As for cultural concerns, it usually starts with the "illegals" but it generally evolves to show its true colors. There are plenty of "legals" who like to keep their own culture, and as long as the market caters to it (because there's certainly money to be made), it will continue to happen. I personally don't like how pervasive it is. When I visit my parents, I do my part by speaking English to everyone in the stores, etc.. Even if they speak Spanish to me, I respond in English. It earns me some glares, but I refuse to do business that way while on US soil. Of course, in Mexico I do precisely the opposite :p I don't expect everyone there to learn English just for me.

/end off-topic~ness

[JustinTime]

I'm looking forward to the US being turned into Mexico. In other words the elimination of the middle class. It's nice to have an abundance of eager peasants willing to work for slave wages at any menial job you don't want to do yourself. When they shoot at each other, I'll just lock the door of my compound and be entertained by the show.

At that point, I seriously think about doing my Austin Powers impersonation, when he came out of the Cryo-Freeze: "Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh comrades, eh?" and pointing at your front door. It goes against everything Ive ever believed, but then again, self-preservation is really my only belief.

[JustinTime]

As for cultural concerns, it usually starts with the "illegals" but it generally evolves to show its true colors. There are plenty of "legals" who like to keep their own culture, and as long as the market caters to it (because there's certainly money to be made), it will continue to happen. I personally don't like how pervasive it is. When I visit my parents, I do my part by speaking English to everyone in the stores, etc.. Even if they speak Spanish to me, I respond in English. It earns me some glares, but I refuse to do business that way while on US soil. Of course, in Mexico I do precisely the opposite :p I don't expect everyone there to learn English just for me.

/end off-topic~ness

Its not about learning English or eating tacos. Its the seething resentment that they are "owed" something, that theyre treated badly (if there is really so much racism they wouldnt be here), and generally favor leftist politics.

[BlackTerrel]

Posting racial name calling i see....How is "Angry White Redneck" different than "Uppity Black ******"?

Yes - South Park hates white people :rolleyes:

[MelissaWV]

Its not about learning English or eating tacos. Its the seething resentment that they are "owed" something, that theyre treated badly (if there is really so much racism they wouldnt be here), and generally favor leftist politics.

Who is talking about tacos? And who is "they"? :confused:

I'm not owed a thing, but I'd love to be left the hell alone by TPTB :)

[nbhadja]

Its not about learning English or eating tacos. Its the seething resentment that they are "owed" something, that theyre treated badly (if there is really so much racism they wouldnt be here), and generally favor leftist politics.

+1 That is my big concern.

Not only do they commit so much crime, they benefit from and hence support subsidization/big government/welfare. Even if they are made legal it would not solve a thing as the pro welfare, pro big government group would instantly gain millions and millions of supporters. The globalists want the extra 20 million voters to their side and will push for amnesty hard just like they did in 2007. As the legal Hispanic population increases, it will unfortunately swing the pendulum of voters to support more amnesty candidates.

Just look at how quickly these border states succumbed to decay. I dare any PC folks to go to a border state and say otherwise. Once nice cities have been bankrupt and filled with crime, welfare users, high dropout rates. East LA is a prime example of it.

If we were to propose to abolish welfare, guess who would be the first to fight against it??

[silentshout]

Its not about learning English or eating tacos. Its the seething resentment that they are "owed" something, that theyre treated badly (if there is really so much racism they wouldnt be here), and generally favor leftist politics.

Well, I'd think that's the fault of other parties not reaching out to them.

[MelissaWV]

Most of the "legal" Hispanics I know do not favor amnesty.

Some of you are distinctly talking out of your posteriors.

2001 data:


According to the poll, 55 percent of U.S. citizens --- including 51 percent of Hispanics --- believe it's a "very bad idea" to grant amnesty. And 33 percent of Hispanics said they would be less likely to vote for Bush if he continued to pursue amnesty.

2010 info:


A new poll conducted by Zogby finds that while many minority voters do support an amnesty, the majority favor enforcement efforts that encourage illegal aliens to go home. The full details of the poll can be found on the Center for Immigration Studies' website.

The poll surveyed roughly 700 Hispanic, 400 African-American, and 400 Asian-American likely voters. It asked a series of questions regarding how to handle the current illegal alien population living in the United States, whether or not the United States needs to import more foreign labor, and whether current legal immigration numbers are too high or too low.

The poll finds:

In contrast to the leadership of many ethnic advocacy groups, most members of minority groups think immigration is too high.


Hispanics: 56 percent said it is too high; 7 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.
Asian-Americans: 57 percent said immigration is too high; 5 percent said too low; 18 percent just right.
African-Americans: 68 percent said it is too high; 4 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.


Most members of minority groups do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration as many ethnic advocacy groups argue; instead, members feel it's due to a lack of enforcement.


Hispanics: Just 20 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 61 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Asian-Americans: 19 percent said not enough legal immigration; 69 percent said inadequate enforcement.
African-Americans: 16 percent said not enough legal immigration; 70 percent said inadequate enforcement.


Most members of minority groups feel that there are plenty of Americans available to fill unskilled jobs.


Hispanics: 15 percent said legal immigration should be increased to fill unskilled jobs; 65 percent said there are plenty of Americans available to do unskilled jobs, employers just need to pay more.
Asian-Americans: 19 percent said increase immigration; 65 percent said plenty of Americans are available.
African-Americans: 6 percent said increase immigration; 81 percent said plenty of Americans are available.


When asked to choose between enforcement that would cause illegal immigrants in the country to go home or offering them a pathway to citizenship with conditions, most members of minority groups choose enforcement.


Hispanics: 52 percent support enforcement to encourage illegals to go home; 34 percent support conditional legalization.
Asian-Americans: 57 percent support enforcement; 29 percent support conditional legalization.
African-Americans: 50 percent support enforcement; 30 percent support conditional legalization.


Another one in 2008 (this one addressing exit polls post-election):


According to exit polls, 67 percent of Hispanic voters rejected McCain. Only 31 percent voted for him (the remaining 2 percent voted for a third candidate). The fact that more than two-thirds of Hispanic voters turned their backs on the Republican who had tried so hard to legalize millions of their fellow Hispanics disproves comprehensively the idea that Hispanic votes could be purchased at the price of amnesty.

Delving into the exit-poll statistics reveals how pervasive the Hispanic rejection of McCain was. Start with Hispanics aged 65 and over. This demographic is significant because not only are they in Sen. McCain’s age group, but also many of them undoubtedly saw that his immigration bills would help today’s Hispanic newcomers overcome the struggles that they first experienced years ago when they arrived here. 68 percent of them voted for Sen. Obama.

As a naturalized American who vehemently opposes amnesty for illegal aliens, I am also a conservative, and I am amazed by the sheer naivete of some Republicans who think Republican-sponsored amnesties are the way to endear Hispanics to the Republican party. These Republicans tend to dismiss their critics as arguing from anecdotal evidence.

But the evidence is hardly anecdotal -- and hardly confined to this election. The largest amnesty in history was the 1986 amnesty, which legalized 3 million illegal aliens, most of whom were Hispanic. The first presidential election in which they were eligible to vote was in 1996. The Republican candidate that year was Bob Dole -- the man who had been majority leader in the Senate in 1986 and helped pass the amnesty. The chief author of that amnesty was also a Republican, Sen. Alan Simpson. And that amnesty was signed into law by another Republican -- President Reagan. So, you would think there was resounding Hispanic support and gratitude for the Republican candidate in 1996. Wrong. Only 21 percent of Hispanics voted for the Republican.

Some Republicans make a big deal of President Bush’s receiving 40 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2004. But that also meant that 60 percent of Hispanics rejected him.

In fact, considering that Bush got only 34 percent of Hispanic votes in 2000, the 40 percent in 2004 came largely because he proposed a massive amnesty earlier that year and continued to pander to Hispanics. Nevertheless, even his massive pandering campaign was not enough to pull most Hispanic votes away from Democrats.

The bolded part is just for fun ;) I wonder who that other candidate could have been?

[nbhadja]

Most of the "legal" Hispanics I know do not favor amnesty.

Some of you are distinctly talking out of your posteriors.

2001 data:



2010 info:



Another one in 2008 (this one addressing exit polls post-election):



The bolded part is just for fun ;) I wonder who that other candidate could have been?

It's not necessarily what they personally favor about amnesty- it is WHO they favor and Hispanics are typically liberal and vote for amnesty supporting candidates.

Sure during presidential race candidates from both sides favor amnesty, but for congressmen and state level politicians there are some politicians that really do oppose amnesty.

[MelissaWV]

It's not necessarily what they personally favor about amnesty- it is WHO they favor and Hispanics are typically liberal and vote for amnesty supporting candidates.

Sure during presidential race candidates from both sides favor amnesty, but for congressmen and state level politicians there are some politicians that really do oppose amnesty.

Pick something, because before we were talking about "legal" Hispanics, and actually country of origin corresponds with some very different viewpoints within the overreaching umbrella category of "Hispanic." Personally, I wouldn't want someone getting for free what I've had to work for. It's another way of stealing, and it cheapens what ancestors had to go through to get here. The data does not support what you're saying, nor does my anecdotal evidence, so I'm not going to be convinced :) Sorry.

[nbhadja]

Pick something, because before we were talking about "legal" Hispanics, and actually country of origin corresponds with some very different viewpoints within the overreaching umbrella category of "Hispanic." Personally, I wouldn't want someone getting for free what I've had to work for. It's another way of stealing, and it cheapens what ancestors had to go through to get here. The data does not support what you're saying, nor does my anecdotal evidence, so I'm not going to be convinced :) Sorry.

How about this for you: Mestizo's typically vote for liberal candidates. Another: Immigrants from Latin America typically vote for liberal candidates. Also they usually are liberal themselves.

I think the stats from elections back that up :).

[AlexMerced]

How about this for you: Mestizo's typically vote for liberal candidates. Another: Immigrants from Latin America typically vote for liberal candidates. Also they usually are liberal themselves.

I think the stats from elections back that up :).

I can tell you from being ina spanish family that usally the values are much more consistent with the conservatives (due to being super catholic most people in my family are pro-life, fiscally conservative, and appreciate self-determinism) although while it's not values that alienate them from voting republican... it's just the reality that most of the republican leaders are morons and blatantly racially and gender wise alienating.

We can win that vote with a more welcoming big tent leadership, with people like Paul and Schiff... like my mom looooooves ron paul... but still dislikes pretty much all other republicans.

Plus diversity is an issue, it's not that people should be included to be PC, but it does send a statement and I'm not saying the party should artifically create multi-racial icons... cause that looks bad we saw how forced and contrived michael steele and bobby jindahls rises to fame were.

We need conservatives from every creed, race, gender to step up and to help attract people to message within their current collectivist mindset and shatter it with some good ol' education on individualism.

I volunteer to be the hispanic conservative poster boy if the RNC is listening :), my charisma is pretty good :).

[MelissaWV]

I can tell you from being ina spanish family that usally the values are much more consistent with the conservatives (due to being super catholic most people in my family are pro-life, fiscally conservative, and appreciate self-determinism) although while it's not values that alienate them from voting republican... it's just the reality that most of the republican leaders are morons and blatantly racially and gender wise alienating.

We can win that vote with a more welcoming big tent leadership, with people like Paul and Schiff... like my mom looooooves ron paul... but still dislikes pretty much all other republicans.

Plus diversity is an issue, it's not that people should be included to be PC, but it does send a statement and I'm not saying the party should artifically create multi-racial icons... cause that looks bad we saw how forced and contrived michael steele and bobby jindahls rises to fame were.

We need conservatives from every creed, race, gender to step up and to help attract people to message within their current collectivist mindset and shatter it with some good ol' education on individualism.

I volunteer to be the hispanic conservative poster boy if the RNC is listening :), my charisma is pretty good :).

Bleh... you sunk my battleship. I just like being told that I "tend to vote for amnesty" or support it. Don't you? I mean, you're Hispanic~ish! We should totally vote for amnesty, you and I.

My family is very Ron Paul on most things, and my dad had lots of success spreading the message around at work in Miami. Unfortunately, a lot of Cubans he ran into wanted to equate the "struggle" of the Mexicans with their family's "struggle" to make it to Florida (wet foot/dry foot), and Florida is a huge mess in general, but "legal Hispanics" overall are not anywhere near overwhelmingly pro-amnesty as a group.

[JustinTime]

Who is talking about tacos? And who is "they"? :confused:

"They" is immigrants.

When people talk about not "becoming American", its not about what you eat, which language you speak, etc., although usually the discussion degenerates into something like that.
IMO, it should be about valuing freedom, individualism, and its painfully obvious large portions of modern immigrants lean left, adding to the ones born here and making the countrys future pretty goddamn bleak. We've done a pathetic job of assimilating them into the only thing truly "American".

For me, the tipping point came a decade ago watching the hysteria over prop 187. If we had the right sort of immigrants, they'd have said "Fine, didnt want that shit anyway".

Immigration should have come in either a trickle, or in "waves", with alternating periods of high and very low immigration.


I'm not owed a thing, but I'd love to be left the hell alone by TPTB :)

Im owed a few things, but nothing thats taken from anyone else, regardless, those of us here are rare and getting rarer.

[JustinTime]

Well, I'd think that's the fault of other parties not reaching out to them.

What else do they want? Aside from a little grumbling nobody seriously opposes them or makes any demands of them. Todays immigrants, in general, have absolutely no reason whatsoever to be angry with this country.

[nbhadja]

I can tell you from being ina spanish family that usally the values are much more consistent with the conservatives (due to being super catholic most people in my family are pro-life, fiscally conservative, and appreciate self-determinism) although while it's not values that alienate them from voting republican... it's just the reality that most of the republican leaders are morons and blatantly racially and gender wise alienating.

We can win that vote with a more welcoming big tent leadership, with people like Paul and Schiff... like my mom looooooves ron paul... but still dislikes pretty much all other republicans.

Plus diversity is an issue, it's not that people should be included to be PC, but it does send a statement and I'm not saying the party should artifically create multi-racial icons... cause that looks bad we saw how forced and contrived michael steele and bobby jindahls rises to fame were.

We need conservatives from every creed, race, gender to step up and to help attract people to message within their current collectivist mindset and shatter it with some good ol' education on individualism.

I volunteer to be the hispanic conservative poster boy if the RNC is listening :), my charisma is pretty good :).

But Hispanics typically vote liberal. Latin America is big so in some countries they might be conservative, but as a whole its overwhelmingly liberal.

Living here in Florida I can tell you that every single country in Florida votes republican except for the Miami metropolitan area which is big time liberal.

I don't really see republicans as racist. Sure they are morons but I would say they are a tad less moronic than liberals lol.

But the problem is that you can't force diversity in the GOP. Let's face the facts- Blacks and Hispanics are usually liberal, the Asian majority tends to be Republican but its not that strong as there are plenty of Asian liberals.

I am Indian. Indians are usually Republican as a whole but there are plenty of liberal Indians for some reason. It doesn't make much sense really for a Indian to vote liberal.

The Ron Paul rallies were mainly white males. Even the polls here on rpf have always showed majority white males. It's not their fault there is no diversity.

Become a liberal and then the RNC will take you and make you their leader :).

[AlexMerced]

Bleh... you sunk my battleship. I just like being told that I "tend to vote for amnesty" or support it. Don't you? I mean, you're Hispanic~ish! We should totally vote for amnesty, you and I.

My family is very Ron Paul on most things, and my dad had lots of success spreading the message around at work in Miami. Unfortunately, a lot of Cubans he ran into wanted to equate the "struggle" of the Mexicans with their family's "struggle" to make it to Florida (wet foot/dry foot), and Florida is a huge mess in general, but "legal Hispanics" overall are not anywhere near overwhelmingly pro-amnesty as a group.

Sounds like your agreeing with me, and yeah my family is not for amnesty, I mean we all think there are too many barriers to get in, but I'm telling you any strongly catholic communities in general are pretty strong on the rule of law.

But again, the current perception of being labeled a republican is soooo negative.

[constituent]

but I'm telling you any strongly catholic communities in general are pretty strong on the rule of law.


Yea, just google "Porfiriato." It cracks me up when people start blabbering on and on about how "mexicans" or "hispanics" or whatever word that person's comfortable throwing out there "pretty much all lean left." If you think the forces at play during the time of the Mexican Revolution are not at play this very second, you're tripping.

Latin America, Central America, Mexicans, Hispanics, again,whatever label you want to throw out there... they all have the whole spectrum. And yes, there is a strong history of catholic conservatism in Mexico and the lands south. There is also an equally strong history of individuals struggling for "human rights," "civil liberties," whatever name you want to give it... Capitalists vs. Socialists, Communists vs. Anarchists, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

[erowe1]

What in the world are "American values"? And who's business is it to regulate them?

[nbhadja]

The Hispanic population, particularly the large Mexican American and Salvadoran American population in the Southwest and the large Puerto Rican and Dominican populations in the Northeast, have been strong supporters of the Democratic Party. They commonly favor liberal views on immigration.[citation needed] In the 1996 presidential election, Democratic President Bill Clinton received 72% of the Hispanic vote. Since then, however, the Republican Party has gained increasing support from the Hispanic community, especially among Hispanic Protestants and Pentecostals. Along with Bush's much more liberal views on immigration, President Bush was the first Republican president to gain 40% of the Hispanic vote (he did so in the 2004 presidential election). Yet, the Republican Party's support among Hispanics eroded in the 2006 midterm elections, dropping from 44 to 30 percent, with the Democrats gaining in the Hispanic vote from 55% in 2004 to 69% in 2006.

Democrats increased their share of the Hispanic vote in the 2008 presidential election, with Barack Obama receiving 67%.

[AlexMerced]

Yea, just google "Porfiriato." It cracks me up when people start blabbering on and on about how "mexicans" or "hispanics" or whatever word that person's comfortable throwing out there "pretty much all lean left." If you think the forces at play during the time of the Mexican Revolution are not at play this very second, you're tripping.

Latin America, Central America, Mexicans, Hispanics, again,whatever label you want to throw out there... they all have the whole spectrum. And yes, there is a strong history of catholic conservatism in Mexico and the lands south. There is also an equally strong history of individuals struggling for "human rights," "civil liberties," whatever name you want to give it... Capitalists vs. Socialists, Communists vs. Anarchists, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

True, my grandfather was second in comand to Castillo Armas who removed the socialist Arben dictatorship in the 50's with help from the CIA... although... him and Armas got killed afterwards which led to 30 years of war and political instablity, but the intention was good.

[AlexMerced]

YouTube - Jobs, Markets, Emegration, Student Loans, Capital Controls (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR8CLPUS5Y0)

in this new video, schiffs talk about how mexicans are going back to mexico for jobs...
I think this is MUCH scarier than the other way around...

[JustinTime]

What in the world are "American values"? And who's business is it to regulate them?

Freedom. Its not solely American, but its our lone defining characteristic.

[JustinTime]

Yea, just google "Porfiriato."


Supporters of Porfirio Díaz.

A man generally described as "conservative" (which may mean something good, but may not) whos been dead for what... 100 years? Dusting off the Mexican history book has little bearing on Mexicans coming here today or how they are manipulated by Marxists.

Which pro-liberty candidate has gotten a solid majority of Hispanics behind him or her?

[JustinTime]

The Hispanic population, particularly the large Mexican American and Salvadoran American population in the Southwest and the large Puerto Rican and Dominican populations in the Northeast, have been strong supporters of the Democratic Party. They commonly favor liberal views on immigration.[citation needed] In the 1996 presidential election, Democratic President Bill Clinton received 72% of the Hispanic vote. Since then, however, the Republican Party has gained increasing support from the Hispanic community, especially among Hispanic Protestants and Pentecostals. Along with Bush's much more liberal views on immigration, President Bush was the first Republican president to gain 40% of the Hispanic vote (he did so in the 2004 presidential election). Yet, the Republican Party's support among Hispanics eroded in the 2006 midterm elections, dropping from 44 to 30 percent, with the Democrats gaining in the Hispanic vote from 55% in 2004 to 69% in 2006.

Democrats increased their share of the Hispanic vote in the 2008 presidential election, with Barack Obama receiving 67%.

Racist. Facts are racist.

[AlexMerced]

Racist. Facts are racist.

No, facts arn't racist, nor do they mean anything at face value, it's like what's wrong with economist these days they take statistics at face value without trying to understand motivations of human action underneath them. Yes, hispaniscs have been known to vote to the left, on face value the conclusion would be their values are consistent with the left... but that would be the positivist let's not examine further approach

a Mises inspired praxeologist would spend sometime trying to understand the environment and factors to see what is the conditions that motivated these actions... or else there's no way to understand what the facts really mean and how to fix a problem.

Facts arn't racist, but they arn't always what they seem either... leanr from the great Austrians, don't fall into the Keynesian trap of taking facts at face value.

[JustinTime]

No, facts arn't racist, nor do they mean anything at face value, it's like what's wrong with economist these days they take statistics at face value without trying to understand motivations of human action underneath them. Yes, hispaniscs have been known to vote to the left, on face value the conclusion would be their values are consistent with the left... but that would be the positivist let's not examine further approach

a Mises inspired praxeologist would spend sometime trying to understand the environment and factors to see what is the conditions that motivated these actions... or else there's no way to understand what the facts really mean and how to fix a problem.

Facts arn't racist, but they arn't always what they seem either... leanr from the great Austrians, don't fall into the Keynesian trap of taking facts at face value.

Ok, so why do Hispanics tend to favor left-leaning politicians?

They vote for the left because the rights "racist". Why do they perceive the right as "racist", because they covertly try to keep the Hispanic population to a minimum, and why do they do that? Because they vote for the left. And so on and so on.

[RedStripe]

Hahaha "Historical entitlement."


Ahahahhahaha

The OP doesn't realize that the same delusional "Historical entitlement" he is criticizing is foundation of his own position.

hahahahaha

[JustinTime]

Hahaha "Historical entitlement."


Ahahahhahaha

The OP doesn't realize that the same delusional "Historical entitlement" he is criticizing is foundation of his own position.

hahahahaha

I took him to be talking about liberty, which is a fine historical entitlement and much better than "that flag used to fly over this dirt".

[Lord Xar]

We need conservatives from every creed, race, gender to step up and to help attract people to message within their current collectivist mindset and shatter it with some good ol' education on individualism.
..

We can, but legally is balancing act with you. Illegals should not be here, period. I don't care what your "idealogy" is - you have open borders, then you get a MUCH BIGGER GOVT, entitlements, overburdened schools/social/health services.. and that is not a 'theory', that is fact.

We don't have an age of "industrial revolution" w/ small government and minimal welfare, like we did previously. We have the opposite, and you goofs wanna bring in tens of millions 'citizens of the world', and tens of millions more thru chain migration - to suckle at the teet of the govt - that we all have to pay for.

We allow over 1million people into this country every year, that by itself is too much. But it is legal. Now we have a bunch of knucklehead "open border libertarians" who haven't a clue but to support more of the big govt systems they "supposedly hate". oh well -

watch this: YouTube - Numbers USA - Immigration By the Numbers - Part 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyTmClBU7nA)

then go to part two. This is fairly concise and is bearing itself out to be completely true.

fuck open borders at this time in history. perhaps when all of the welfare, big government is no more - and we don't have the agenda of the "north american union" etc.. then "maybe" open borders can work. But with the shit-hole that is mexico/el salvador pushing out its waste north for us to deal with, no way jose'! If they had vibrant, and productive economies etc.. then it could be a two-way street. But now? forget it. All you open border apologists are just asking for a disaster.
Friggin statist "hide behind 'I am a libertarian'" monicker.

[Marenco]

Immigrant Myths Vs Facts

By Thomas R. Eddlem, The New American
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/immigrantmythvsfact27apr06.shtml

April 27, 2006



Politicians and pundits are defending illegal immigration with worn-out myths that can easily be proven wrong.

Myth: Illegal immigrants contribute greatly to the American economy.

Fact: So-called statistics supporting this myth are typically a deceptive amalgam of statistics and supposition arranged to conceal an undeniable truth. Consider, for instance, this statement from the ACLU paper Immigrants and the Economy (2002): "Immigrants pay more than $90 billion in taxes every year and receive only $5 billion in welfare. Without their contributions to the public treasury, the economy would suffer enormous losses." If 32.5 million immigrants (the total of legal and illegal immigrants, according to the recent U.S. Census figures) really pay $90 billion in taxes, then they pay half the taxes the average native-born American pays. Note too that the ACLU combines both legal and illegal immigrants into its statistic. Most taxes paid by immigrants are paid by legal immigrants. Illegal immigrants often pay little or no taxes because many of them are working "under the table" in the underground, cash-based economy.

Welfare is a term limited to only a few federal subsidy programs, and the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) notes: "Even though illegal aliens make little use of welfare, from which they are generally barred, the costs of illegal immigration in terms of government expenditures for education, criminal justice, and emergency medical care are significant." CIS estimates that the total net cost of illegal immigration is an annual drain on the government of $11-22 billion annually.

Myth: We are a nation of immigrants.

Fact: This myth is false on its face. Nearly 88 percent of the people living in the United States today are not immigrants; they were born here. This is a nation of natives, not a nation of immigrants. "But," the liberal propagandists reply, "we all have ancestors who come from other countries." And, one might reply, so does just about every other nation on Earth.

Are not the French merely descendents of the immigrant barbarian Franks, who drove out the Roman era Celtic Gauls? And the English are simply immigrant Angles and Saxons who virtually wiped out the Celtic Britons in the fifth century A.D. They too are simply nations of immigrants under this liberal myth, as is practically every other nation on Earth. The myth descends to meaninglessness upon any serious analysis. Yet whenever this myth is uttered, we are expected to nod our heads in agreement that a deep and salient point has been made.

Myth: You cannot deport 12 million people.

Fact: This is nothing more than a slogan for people who have stopped trying to address the problem. The U.S. government needs to begin deporting illegal aliens, and even if it only deports a fraction of them over the next few years that would be progress. If the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency deported only two million of the 12 million illegal aliens, 10 million illegals would be better than 12 million.

Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) notes that enforcing employer sanctions could lead many to go home on their own without deportation proceedings: "If you can't get a job in this country, and if you can't get social service benefits, you go home." Additionally, a lot of immigrants visit families on their own, and wouldn't be able to get back in if Congress decides to secure the border.

On the other hand, if the 12 million illegals are legalized, none would be deported. Moreover, this amnesty (whether called amnesty or not) would simply induce more illegals to cross the Rio Grande in the hopes of waiting until the next amnesty.

Myth: Illegal immigrants are only taking jobs Americans do not want.

Fact: Many illegal immigrants are able to work for less than market value because they don't pay income or Social Security taxes and are able to take their entire paycheck (or cash) home. This is not only unfair competition against employers who follow the law and pay employees "above the table," but it depresses the wage scale for Americans who would otherwise select jobs currently filled by illegal immigrants. These are jobs that Americans "do not want" only because the illegal immigrants have depressed the wage scale for the positions. Take away the illegal immigrants, and the market would raise wages to the level where Americans would take the jobs.

Myth: Guest workers would only be here temporarily.

Fact: History demonstrates that "guest workers" would be as temporary as the "temporary" telephone tax, still in effect, that Congress enacted in 1898 to pay for the Spanish-American War. And what would happen if 12 million "guest workers" decided not to leave? Those who argue against deporting the current 12 million illegal aliens as impractical are likely, if challenged, to say they find the prospect of deporting "guest workers" impractical as well.

Thus, it is hardly surprising that President Bush fails to mention a time limit on the "temporary" worker visas the federal government would permit under the "guest worker" program he is pushing in his public addresses. Most pending congressional legislation would limit the "guest worker" to three years - but what then?

Myth: Illegal immigrants have a right to come here. It is our Christian duty to provide hospitality.

Fact: Nearly two-thirds of the 32.5 million foreign-born people living in the United States entered this country legally, and the United States has more legal immigrants than any other country in the world. That's hardly poor hospitality, and no bill before Congress that has a chance of becoming law would change this nation's hospitality. But it is poor hospitality to say to the nearly 22 million legal U.S. immigrants who waited in line that they wasted their time following the rules because illegal immigrants will now get the same status.

The need to deport illegal aliens and secure our borders has nothing to do with persecuting minorities or lack of hospitality. The United States can continue to allow a large or small number of immigrants into this country legally, depending upon how many can be reasonably assimilated without destroying our American identity. Rather, securing our borders is necessary as a matter of principle - in the interests of equal justice under law - as well as practical security in this age of international terrorism. And this nation can no longer afford to allow "myth-information" slogans to sidetrack the nation from fulfilling the mandate of controlling the borders.

[constituent]

Supporters of Porfirio Díaz.

Wow, you googled!




A man generally described as "conservative" (which may mean something good, but may not) whos been dead for what... 100 years? Dusting off the Mexican history book has little bearing on Mexicans coming here today or how they are manipulated by Marxists.

Yea, sorry, I was just trying to make it easy for you... Rest assured that ol' Pofirio was neither the first, nor the last, conservative to reach such heights in Mexican politics.



Which pro-liberty candidate has gotten a solid majority of Hispanics behind him or her?

You act like the non-hispanics are crawling over each other to get to the polls and vote for liberty candidates.

Until you can prove so, your statement is invalid as an argument.

Try again.

[constituent]

Freedom. Its not solely American, but its our lone defining characteristic.

lol, that and rampant jingoism....

Ever tried to get back into the United States overland? Ever driven from Laredo, TX to Freer, TX?

Nothing says freedom like checkpoints with armed guards, and standing in line to be harassed, interrogated, spoken down to and searched every time you come home.

[constituent]

Ok, so why do Hispanics tend to favor left-leaning politicians?

Why do non-hispanics?

[constituent]

Immigrant Myths Vs Facts

By Thomas R. Eddlem, The New American
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/immigrantmythvsfact27apr06.shtml
The United States can continue to allow a large or small number of immigrants into this country legally, depending upon how many can be reasonably assimilated without destroying our American identity.

There is no "our" American identity, Thomas R. Eddlem, dumb fuck.

[JustinTime]

Wow, you googled!

Lets not degenerate into rudeness again, especially knowing that you googled "Mexican Conservatives" and threw out the first name you came across.


You act like the non-hispanics are crawling over each other to get to the polls and vote for liberty candidates.

Until you can prove so, your statement is invalid as an argument.

White non-Hispanics, and Cubans tend to do so more than others. Thats rational, factual and valid.

[Brian4Liberty]

I've lived in California most of my life, and I can talk with first hand experience...I remember stopping at a supermarket in Socali to ask for directions and could NOT find anyone that spoke english.

And you don't speak any Spanish in California? ;)

[JustinTime]

lol, that and rampant jingoism....

Wanting the best possible future for your country isnt jingoism.


Ever tried to get back into the United States overland? Ever driven from Laredo, TX to Freer, TX?

Nothing says freedom like checkpoints with armed guards, and standing in line to be harassed, interrogated, spoken down to and searched every time you come home.

Im more concerned about where changing demographics are taking this country than the right of people from another to live here. Im not sure they have such a right anyway.

Youre using the Communist tactic of appealing to conflicting rights, like the right of one to keep what he earns being countered by saying another person has a right to have things provided to him, positive vs. negative liberties, etc.

FTR, Id be in favor of open borders in some alternate universe where we had no welfare state, and whomever our border was open with gave US citizens reciprocal rights. Seeing as how the people who run the country have an interest in the former and non at all in the latter, screw it.

[Brian4Liberty]

Simple. Deport any non-Americans.

And by Americans, I mean original Americans.

Out with all the Europeans, Asians, Africans, South and Central Americans.

Depending on the percentage required, I might agree to that. ;)

Most Americans are of mixed ancestry. We are Americans and nothing else. No other country would have us.

[Brian4Liberty]

Most of the "legal" Hispanics I know do not favor amnesty.


That is my experience too, although I do have some friends who are die-hard Democrats and their opinion (in favor) of immigration is pretty much race driven. Much of their humor too.

IMHO, race problems and divisions are driven by politicians and the media (including entertainment). Many people feel that they benefit in one way or another by fanning the flames, or just starting the fire themselves.

[Brian4Liberty]

What in the world are "American values"? And who's business is it to regulate them?

No one can regulate them. But those "American values" originally tended to be Liberty, freedom, justice, fairness, honesty, "golden rule", etc. That was the ideal, of course it was never 100% in place.

Many cultures around the world are run by corruption, abuse, injustice, fraud, theft, rip-offs, concentration of power and wealth, etc. Of course that is all a gross generalization too, and individuals will vary dramatically.

You are correct, we really don't have to worry about "American Values" anymore. They have been eliminated.

[AlexMerced]

No one can regulate them. But those "American values" originally tended to be Liberty, freedom, justice, fairness, honesty, "golden rule", etc. That was the ideal, of course it was never 100% in place.

Many cultures around the world are run by corruption, abuse, injustice, fraud, theft, rip-offs, concentration of power and wealth, etc. Of course that is all a gross generalization too, and individuals will vary dramatically.

You are correct, we really don't have to worry about "American Values" anymore. They have been eliminated.

I agree that those are the principles that is "American" although I get the vibe a few of the folks on this thread is more referring to things like english dialects, cultural traditions, not neccessarily things that are directly tied to the principles of the country but things that were formed due to who was involved in the founding.

[revolutionisnow]

March on America on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/10411178)

[Brian4Liberty]

I agree that those are the principles that is "American" although I get the vibe a few of the folks on this thread is more referring to things like english dialects, cultural traditions, not neccessarily things that are directly tied to the principles of the country but things that were formed due to who was involved in the founding.

I forgot "individualism" as an American ideal (rugged or otherwise).

When people say "culture", it's too vague. Better to list the principles, and agree upon them. As for other aspects of "cultural diversity", who doesn't like different foods and new holidays? :)

As a culture, we do make a few laws that might represent our preferences. One example is (not) eating dogs and cats. Of course it's a bit hypocritical (especially from the cows, chickens, fish and pigs perspective), but it is our cultural preference.

[literatim]

I agree that those are the principles that is "American" although I get the vibe a few of the folks on this thread is more referring to things like english dialects, cultural traditions, not neccessarily things that are directly tied to the principles of the country but things that were formed due to who was involved in the founding.

What makes you think you can separate our cultural traditions and our liberty, justice, fairness, and honesty?

[Dunedain]

you goofs wanna bring in tens of millions 'citizens of the world', and tens of millions more thru chain migration - to suckle at the teet of the govt - that we all have to pay for.

We allow over 1million people into this country every year, that by itself is too much. But it is legal. Now we have a bunch of knucklehead "open border libertarians" who haven't a clue but to support more of the big govt systems they "supposedly hate". oh well -

fuck open borders at this time in history. perhaps when all of the welfare, big government is no more - and we don't have the agenda of the "north american union" etc.. then "maybe" open borders can work. But with the shit-hole that is mexico/el salvador pushing out its waste north for us to deal with, no way jose'! If they had vibrant, and productive economies etc.. then it could be a two-way street. But now? forget it. All you open border apologists are just asking for a disaster.
Friggin statist "hide behind 'I am a libertarian'" monicker.

Ouch...no response yet from the open border supporters.