Posted on 02/06/2004 4:28:30 AM PST by Texas_Dawg
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:51:02 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
In his farewell address to the nation, President Reagan said: "I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life . . . [I]n my mind it was . . . teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Yes, well as the great Karl Marx said (and we all know how right he was about everything), capitalism will lead to people wanting that. Surely these anti-business FReepers aren't secretly hoping Marx will be right on this one, right? I mean, it would make those war games and Y2K/militia bunkers not look so stupid and paranoid.
I am sick and damned tired of this vapid and insulting mantra! Did the Native American Indians just form like magic out of the dust of the ground, or at one time did their ancestors immigrate here from somewhere else?
How many centuries does a man have to be able to trace his ancestry on this soil before he isn't labeled "an immigrant"? There are blacks in this country whose ancestors were wandering around the South long before there was even a United States. So how long will we continue to call them African-American? How long before I can finally be called a "native" even though I was born here?
Many (if not most) of those who present themselves as speakers for America's indigenous peoples will say 'yes' -- they've always been there. Talking about prehistoric population movement to native American groups is like talking about Darwin to creationists-- you face a distortion of blind creed impervious to direct observation. It's an anti-science anti-logic force that's so bad that no one can even find authoritative estimates of population growth for pre-Columbian America.
The rest of the letter was spot on. Too bad they flubbed that one line.
Would it be worth billions of dollars to institute a massive, federal bureaucracy crack-down on rampant jay-walking? Or would it be smarter to just make some guidelines and create an environment to make it safer and more efficient for people to cross the street without getting hit?
Have you really thought this issue through, especially about the ramifications of what would happen if your proposals were enacted?
This is a complete abdication of responsibility and accountability
So what you're saying is that the only way to maintain responsibility and accountability is to make sure laws do not reflect reality and common sense.
to answer ur ?; One.
In one generation, the first where that child of the immigrant is born HERE; that child will forevermore be a native American. No matter what others say, despite the many hues inferred by our modern-day multicultural mavens onto our daily consciousness, there (and they...) can never alter this truth.
All you, I and anyone else has to do is simply claim and live this precious and sacred birthright.
Teddy Roosevelt said it best: see http://www.rpatrick.com/USA/americanism/
and frm which I share a portion of this truth with you:
"... There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.
When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts "native" before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as any one else.
The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic..."
Juan // CGVet58
The concept of early population movement is probably one of the very few things Creationists/Darwinists would agree on - (the 'prehistoric' part being a point of contention because Creationists, with the exception of five days, believe man was recording all history. :) )
Also considering the hysteria over what is taught in government schools regarding origins, I am curious if the "magically formed out of the dust" position is actually taught in reservation schools. (Creationists would like to say that it happened only once in Eden, and evolutionists would like to add plenty of water to that dust)
It's an anti-science anti-logic force that's so bad...
I wonder if that same "anti-science anti-logic force" is what causes them to vote in the likes of Tom Dasshole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.