Free Republic

I am sorry, Jim, post #88 was meant to be addressed to you.

I am sorry, Jim, post #86 was meant to be addressed to you.

I guess, the absence of your reply is a reply in an of itself. I learn from it that even a one-word post with nothing but name-calling is within the current guidelines you set for this forum. It has been approved by AdminModerators and you personally.

Here is something fresher: an open threat of violence, and it is not the first from this poster. Pinged to a mob of people, it is apparently within your current guidelines as well:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2691276/posts?page=193#193

When the SHTF...and it will...I'll be looking for people like you. You'd better be looking out for people like me if you know whats good for you.

Well, you are the boss; and the boss has spoken --- with his silence, but loud and clear.

Like you, I hope that the "revolt is coming," as you once said --- a revolt against the Leftists who now dominate our culture and government. For the past ten years I contributed, to the best of my abilities, to the discussion of conservative issues on this forum. Thank you very much for this opportunity.

I wish you all the best --- in your personal life, your profession, and in all your endeavors, including this forum.

May G-d bless you for being a true partiot of this blessed county of ours, for serving it througout your life, and for creating this forum.

We like to live better than the past. And that is a crime how...

Nobody said it was a crime. I just urge us to be honest with ourselves: Westerners like good life more than having children. You have more money than an Indian or African even after paying for illegal immigrants.

I also suggested that you should look at history and statistics. The birthrate was falling in Western counties well before they started to import foreign workers. Germany, for example, invited Turkish workers decades ago precisely in response to its falling population and void of workers needed to maintain the living standards to which it has become accustomed. The did not have any Mexicans (or Turks) at the time.

You keep repeating the same thing and not answering the question. Did French women stop having children over 100 years ago because they had to support illegal Mexican immigrants? Did Germans did the same thirty-fourty years ago because of immigrants? Does birthrate among ethnic Russians nosedived because of immigrants while the birthrate among Muslims in the same Russia, who pay the same taxes, is high?

You should explain all this to yourself. Our illegal immigration is clearly not an explanation.

The idiots that negotiated these agreements ‘on my behalf’ as a taxpayer should pay for these salaries and bennies.

They are not idiots. These people are hired and appointed by elected officials. And voters in New York are overwhelmingly liberal. Don't blame people doing their jobs for the wacko choices of the American public. Lay blame where it belongs.

Why assume blacks will vote RAT?

Exactly. He also assumes that people's voting patterns do not change over their lifetimes. This is a purely racial argument: once you are born Black, you'll never vote Republican. Voting Democratic is a racial feature just like the color of the skin, he thinks.

Their service will still stink.

And you know this... how exactly?

So, ranting against them [Asian students -- TQ] makes little sense. They are not part of the affirmative action crowd that makes it harder for whites to get into good colleges. They are just bright and ambitious.

BTTT.

Libya was one of the un-named nations helping in the war against Al Qaeda.

You are absolutely correct, of course. But UN and NATO are now unable to leave him in power --- for one very low-brow reason: it would be a major embarrassment before each other, the Arabs, and the rest of the world. They'll do now whatever it takes -- mining ports, declaring trade sanctions, arming rebels, enticing inter-tribe warfare...

I think that the victor in this battle is yet undetermined group of tribes that will be haded power of Libya, at the expense of the rest of the tribes, once Qaddafi is removed. He is given much credit for balancing the tribal interests and keeping them in check. Dictatorship is what apparently was necessary for that outcome. It is doubtful that any such strongman will emerge as his replacement; so, it seems to me, the continually simmering and breaking our warfare is the likely outcome for the next few years.

the Bush administration is insincere.

What's the date of this article?

A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya

Who'd ever thought that the position one would expect form a conservative is taken by the "hard-core... Democrats," while conservatives themselves scream "Go baby, go!"

The world must've turned upside-down one night when I was sleeping.

You are soooo good at your craft...

I really am shocked and disgusted that she said that.

If you heard what she said, you'd be neither shocked nor disgusted. She spoke against hysteria about radiation.

Nobody could’ve said it better; many thanks for your thoughtful post.

What many here are not mentioning is that American women and families are NOT having as many children because they cannot afford them.

One often hears this argument, which seemingly absolves every couple that chooses not to have children or to have fewer of them, but, with all due respect, it cannot be true prima facie. We certainly have much more resources than our medieval ancestors who had 5-7 children while having lifespan one half of hours..

Let me also give you a more concrete example. An average house built today is 40% larger than the one built in 1950s (and that house would be itself considered a palace in most parts of the world). The family is almost twice smaller. It follows that an average home-buyer has almost three times (!) more living space than his/her parents or grandparents. But if you ask, every one of them will whine, "I am just trying to make ends meet."

No, living like a king is not trying to make ends meet. Updating LCD TVs every three years and phones every 18 moths is not trying to make ends meet. The malls are quite full on Saturdays, but the maternity wards are not.

I beg to disagree: we Westerners have plenty of money for our children; we just don't want them as much as we used to do.

P.S. How do you explain that Africans and Latin Americans have more children than we do? They are more rich? How do you explain that immigrants from Mexico have more children, but not immigrants from Russia or Belgium? Are Mexican immigrants more rich? Nah, money has nothing to do with that.

Leftism always seems to infantilize societies and cultures.

That's a very interesting thought. I'll remember and ponder on this idea. Many thanks.

President Bush did not do a terrible job of communicating the reason for and progress in that war. The enemedia did however do a terrible job

I merely expressed my opinion. It was not based on what media did or did not tell me; it is based on what I heard when Bush spoke himself.

Is it white women don't want them or white men or both?

Seems to me that both. It's not like women went to work against the wishes of men: if they did we would have heard about millions and millions of women abandoned by their husbands for working outside the home. All those husbands bought into the mantra "mom's work won't hurt the baby" --- just like they later bought into a pro-divorce mantra, "It's better for children if parents are divorced rather than hear them argue all the time." Most importantly, those same men really enjoyed the extra paycheck. It looked as if this is all benefits but no costs. You and I know that there were costs, but those accrued to the children (born and aborted), and we don't hear about this much because children have no voice.

So it seems to me that this is just a general cultural trend shared equally by men and women. The same French at the end of 19th century appear to prove the same: they stopped having babies without wives going to work.

As cynical as this may sound, but people appear to simply egotistical and prefer to live for themselves rather than children. From those in their 20s and 30s, I hear constantly, "Don't rush to get married, enjoy life for a while" (as if marriage is a pure chore and burden); and, "We don't want to rush with the baby (in singular) and prefer to travel and enjoy life for a while" (as if children are pure burden). I did not notice any difference between the sexes in such attitudes.

At the rate Cali is going I’m expecting within about 20 or so years to see the state become a part of Mexico. It’s possible that Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas will suffer the same fate, too.

It well may be so, especially if some larger civil war erupts. If it does not, I think that the birthrates of everyone else but Anglos will make Anglos a small and silent minority, and traditional, English roots of our culture with die off. There may be no need to join Mexico: it's possible that they would simply have this, more prosperous than Mexico, country for themselves.

That's just my two cents, of course. It was good to hear from you, Jack.

Since when does the UN authorize the US to go to war?

Since one half of our fellow Americans believes in one world without borders and at least one half of the remainder do not care.

Do you remember how proud Bush Sr. was when he created a coalition that liberated Kuwait. It's been 20 years, a full generation, ago.

Everyone and his dog thinks nowadays in collectivist terms: as long as we sat down 'round table, shared our feelings, and came to a consensus --- all is well! Principles, our Constitution, the gradual submission of our courts to foreign ones --- all be d-mned 'cause we reached a consensus.

It is all about some delusional touchy-feely thing. Has someone, whether Europeans, UN, our government, even tried to tell us whom we are supporting in Libya or what kind of structure they see will emerge? The point is not whether to agree with their opinion but what is that opinion? Not a word of reasoning, but all governments are beating themselves in their populist chests, "We want to defend the pe-e-o-o-ple of Libya." Yep, all 50 tribes from each other.

I did see a point for us to be in Iraq, although I thought that Bush did a terrible job of communicating the reason for and progress in that war. But this is shear madness. I am still struggling to explain why conservatives, including Sarah Palin, would even think a second about supporting attacks on Libya. But they blame the President for not doing enough.

G-d help this country. I do think we are at the first stages of a thorough redefinition of the world, similar to the one that occurred after WW I. We may not even recognize our own country in a just a couple of years.

The very real consequences of unregulated, Mexican immigration.

True, but you must've forgotten the other main factor: American Whites don't want babies and don't grow in numbers for decades now (since 1970, I seem to remember). They are not alone: the French drastically dropped the birth rate in the fourth quarter of 1800s.