Ronald Reagan Is Alive in India

Real Clear Politics ^ | June 2, 2014 | Allan Meltzer

[ansel12]

There is an “Close the door behind me” crowd.

The United States is the nation we created, it isn’t the world’s bus station and grab bag, how did you ever get the notion that there is a global right to our country?

[Dr. Sivana]

I stated my position clearly. I never stated there was a “global right to our country”. I stated that I thought that some legal immigration, preferably from countries/cultures compatible with ours, should be continued.

Since you think all of our ills come from immigration, and I think we have had most of our worst troublemakers home-grown (many by the time FDR came along), we aren’t going to come to an agreement on the broader issue of immigration.

[ansel12]

There is no “Close the door behind me” crowd, that is a bizarre and global thinking phrase.

Without immigration America would not have moved left, and could never have moved left to the point of no return, as it has now.

The democrats have not won the white vote since 1964, Protestant America voted against FDR in 1940 and 1944, and only barely supported him in 32 and 36, other than that they never voted democrat again, except for the post assassination vote in 1964.

When you look at the vote breakdown you realize that the left exists on immigration, it is also what destroyed our nation and our ability to act in a unified manner as one people, unified in a common heritage and with common goals and a common culture and even fairly common views, we were a people, today we are just a place to work and make money.

[Dr. Sivana]

Of course there’s a close the door behind me crowd. Peter Brimelow is an immigrant ftom England, and that is EXACTLY what he is advocating. I hope you are not suggesting that the know- nothing party of the 19th century was right.

With all of the garbage that has gone on in this country at least since the progressives, and arguably to The War of 1861, making imigration the primary cause of the current break down of the country is a foolish notion. If you try to cut out ALL legal immigration, then you will only have the illegal kind.

[ansel12]

Great, a pro-immigration guy.

Without the votes liberalism dies, who do you think votes liberal?

Why do you think the democrats fought for so many years to replace the people voting against FDR, why do you think the left knows that immigration will finish us off for good?

Why do you think the left is not asking IF Texas will fall, giving them the presidency forever, but WHEN?

Do you think it is because Dewey and Sanger will be so persuasive that they will in time talk the present Texans to switch to being liberals, or do you think they will take it the same way they took California forever?

“”During the 1920s and 1930s Los Angeles was a bastion of Anglo Protestantism, reflecting the values of Midwestern parishioners who had been carried to the Southland on the Southern Pacific Railroad. Well into the 1970s, Protestant denominational leaders enjoyed comfortable, influential ties with the city is still-strong “downtown business
establishment,” which itself was largely Protestant.

The Immigration Act of 1965, however, created the condition for a radically different religious future for the City of Angels-a future that would anoint Roman Catholicism as the area’s dominant religious group. Today Roman Catholicism is the single largest faith tradition in Los Angeles County, with 294 parishes and 3,631,368 adherents.
Among Christians, 71% are Catholics. Between 1980 and 1997, Roman Catholicism experienced a 36% growth.

According to Louis Velasquez, director of the Los Angeles Archdiocese Office of Hispanic Ministry, approximately 70% of Roman Catholics in Los Angeles County are Latino, mostly immigrants from Mexico and Central America.””

[Dr. Sivana]

who do you think votes liberal?

Largely a bunch of WASPs on the Supreme Court in the '50s and '60s whose families were here for hundreds of years. Oh, and a lot of blue bloods who went to Yale and Harvard in the same time period and earlier, though some of them turned out to be RINOs.

[ansel12]

So it is about race with you, while you support the destruction of the nation with the most bizarre thing of all, importing exotic foreigners to wipe out our nation and language and society, and completely eliminate America and conservatism.

How do you justify importing an ever more leftist, anti-American democrat party, are you a democrat?

[Dr. Sivana]

You know, you accuse Entropy of being disingenuous, but you don't address a single point. You just attack a point I didn't make. For the record, I was thinking more pf the "P" in WASP, not so much the "W". But for the record, our most reliable votes come from a man whose ancestors were here longer than most, Clarence Thomas. His ancestors were legal immigrants, Justice Thomas might even have the receipts. Do you find that crazy wop Scalia exotic, too, and his pal Alito? Why not fine jurists like Oliver Wendell Holmes?

Since you don't even read my earlier posts, in which I suggested that legal immigration come mainly from places and cultures that are compatible with our own, and make up points I didn't even hint at, you are being disingenuous or at least reckless, responding beyond your reading comprehension.

[ansel12]

I’m not used to dealing with someone who is pro-immigration, who wants them to keep pouring in, nor in someone who names individuals as a counter to someone opposing mass immigration, that is just weird.

Why do you keep wanting to name individual people as the cause of our decline rather than what creates them and gives them power, the voters, the mass of Americans, seriously, comparing Earl Warren to Clarence Thomas to defend importing 10s of millions of democrats, in fact an endless future of them, unto our final end?

Do you know how protestants vote, and have always voted, JFK did.

Without democrat voters, liberal voters, the left dries up, the left depends on immigration to replace those voters who created the nation, and still vote conservative.

Do you realize that the democrat party dies without immigration?

Why do we want to become India anyway, do you think if 1965 America had been told we were going to bring in a 100 million people and their offspring and try to grow our population to approaching what India’s was in 1960, something that we all felt was terrible, that they would have liked it? That was one of the great deceptions of the left.

When do you decide to stop importing the world’s masses, at 500 million, 700, a billion, two billion or do you plan to keep smothering us as long as science can feed and water us and create apartments for us?

[Dr. Sivana]

I’m not used to dealing with someone who is pro-immigration

You must not get out much. Guys like Rush Limbaugh are pro-legal immigration as well. In any event, I never set a level of legal immigration, only that it should be more than a few thousand (what you called administrative) immigrabts for 50 years.

Why do you keep wanting to name individual people as the cause of our decline rather than what creates them and gives them power, the voters

Individual people like Oliver Wendell Holmes ruined the law schools, John Dewey poisoned the entire public education system, Margaret Sanger was a driving force in the slaughter of millions of babies and the overall objectification of women in this country. They didn't do what they did because a bunch of Latinos or southern Europeans empowered them.

Although this thread started out being about India, I only discussed that to denounce an economics only campaign (on which we agree). If you recall, I attacked the abuse and the expansion of the H1B visa system.

Do you realize that the democrat party dies without immigration?

No it just morphs, the Dems won plenty in the south for decades without much in the way of legal immigrants. Republicans have done well during the Reagan era with Cubans, the offspring of immigrants of Italian and Irish extraction (especially those who escaped the cities).

try to grow our population to approaching what India’s was in 1960, something that we all felt was terrible

Julian Simon's work proved that the problem with India has never been population. In fat, their population has doubled and is rivaling China's, and yet they are doing much better now than they were then economically, and even socially, despite the fact that they are still passing up easily obtained hamburger buffets every day. Though I am against the expansion of the H1B program, I have seen Indians like Dinesh D'Souza who appreciate the genius of America, making the most of it, and making the right enemies. Do you know how protestants vote, and have always voted

I know how they voted on the Supreme Court before and after JFK. A lot of them liked Nelson Rockefeller. A lot of them are RINOs. Black Protestants vote about 90% Democrat. It would also be presumptuous to treat Protestants as a single voting bloc.

When do you decide to stop importing the world’s masses, at 500 million, 700, a billion We have aborted 50 million since Harry Blackmun's Roe v. Wade decision. Since our nation's birthrate is barely at replacement level without those missing children, I would suggest that we stop aborting our own and turn back towards God. It is not the Federal Government's business what our population is. I'll leave that kind of centralized planning to the Red Chinese.

[ansel12]

No, I give up, there is no reasoning with you so to keep trying is useless.

When someone gets as far out there as you are in your determination to protect immigration.

You support immigration, and evidently there is some payoff for you at the end.

Are you Catholic? I have run into this with Catholics, immigration and the results of it on America, is a part of their underlying political goal, it is a reason most of them vote democrat.

[Dr. Sivana]

Yes, I am Catholic.

Two, my WASP (Congregationalist) Grandfather always voted as an FDR Democrat.

Three, Catholic support for some legal immigration has nothing (among the Catholics I know, who tend to take it more seriously than the Catholic population at large) to do with any conspiracy, unless they are purposefully keeping me out of the loop. It is a back-burner issue for almost all of them, as more are concerned about things like abortion and the homosexual agenda, with some concerned about reckless spending as well.

[ansel12]

The individuals again. Your grandfather was a minority, for Protestants, who have only gone democrat in 1932, 1936, and 1964.

Catholics have only gone Republican about 4 to 5 times (depending on the source).

Immigration is what keeps the democrats alive and is delivering the nation into their hands, and I have talked to enough Catholics on FR, to learn that is a part of a greater goal for them, it is reflected in the Catholic vote since they started arriving in the US in the mid 1800s and started pushing to Europeanize this nation.

I have learned that to talk to one of you about immigration, is to be arguing with the permanent goal of Rome, to erase America as a blight against Catholicism.

The goal is to make America like the 20 Catholic nations to the South of our border.

Legal and Illegal are the same in contributing to that goal since mass immigration is the goal and legal immigration is massive.

There is no reason at all why an American should be against cutting off this population replacement goal, of the American and international left, but as a catholic you side with them.

[Dr. Sivana]

The individuals again. I dealt with large groups earlier. 90% of U.S. blacks, historically a whole lot of southern whites. You decided to ignore it then, and I am not going to repeat the same points that you ignore.

I have learned that to talk to one of you about immigration, is to be arguing with the permanent goal of Rome, to erase America as a blight against Catholicism.

You can make up your own fantasy, but consistently, serious church-goers of evangelical and Catholic churches vote more conservative than weak practitioners or main-line Protestants these days. Don't just cut the data to fit your argument.

[ansel12]

You didn’t deal with anything, we aren’t importing 10s of millions of blacks and Southern whites who decades ago were voting democrat, although the Protestant vote was, and still is anti-democrat.

What is there to deal with anyway, finding little excuses to justify your support for the left and importing their voters by the millions today, right now, right this minute, the people who voted for Obamas, not Trumans?

You are currently supporting the importation of millions of pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-radical leftist voters, that is your real-life position today.

[Dr. Sivana]

The Margaret Sanger Republicans were pro-abort, right down to Harry Blackmun and John Paul Stevens. Justice Byron White was one of only two dissents (Rehnquist being the other one), and he also wrote the more blistering dissent. If you are going to go to historical voting patterns and party ID, the Republicans have been the more pro-abortion party (both Goldwater and Rockefeller, and Sanger herself) until the white southerners and serious Catholics were brought on board. I think it's sad that you just use the term "immigrants", when Cuban immigrants, as an obvious example have always voted conservative and Republican, and have happily assimilated, learning the language and making their own way. The millions you talk about are largely illegal immigrants, which would likely increase in number if you make nearly ALL immigration illegal. Even if you strengthen the borders, which I support, overstaying a visa is simple, and accounts for half of illegal immigration. If you want to lock down visas, you have just annihilated the entire U.S. tourism industry.

We don't have abortion on demand because of immigrants. It is in my living memory that guys like Richie Daley Jr. and Mike Madigan (who runs the Illinois machine, and yes, an individual) voted and spoke pro-life. The pressure to flip came from our native professional leftists, and from the green light from traitor Catholics like Cdl. Bernardin and Notre Dame head Theodore Hesburgh.

The Polish and other Eastern European immigrants are also happy to base their vote on being pro-life, but they won't back anybody whose first order of business is to lock the door to all comers.

You will recall that one of the FIRST things I stated much earlier in this thread was to have our immigration come from countries and cultures that are compatible with our own. That would pretty much rule out any place practicing Sharia law. Bt you seem just as offended by Cubans, Irish and Canadians.

[ansel12]

You are currently supporting the importation of millions of pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-radical leftist voters, that is your real-life position today.

Remember that when you tell people about your position on abortion and gay marriage.

[Dr. Sivana]

You really have poor reading comprehension. In any event, as you have not rebutted, abortion on demand brought to this country was brought by non-immigrants. I get the feeling you have read one book, and that it reinforced your predisposition. You only seem to be concerned about abortion in how it relates to your perception of immigration.

You should spend your energies against the open borders crowd, instead of on someone who would likely support the same candidates as you 90% of the time.

Are you a single issue anti legal immigration voter?

[ansel12]

See post 57, and look at the voting data next on how the republicans, the pro-life Americans get defeated at the ballot box.

Quit trying to justify what amounts to a pro-abortion argument for immigration.

[Dr. Sivana]

Your post makes no sense.