Replies

How do you feel about the preference being given to immigrants from Mexico and Central American countries in preference to other countries of origin?

This is the problem: balance. Dare I say it? We need: "multiculturalism." By literally flooding the country with Latinos, we are moving into an era un which theirs will be the dominant culture of the US. We are not assimilating them. They are assimilating us!

Also, there is a question of numbers. Since Ted's Immigration "Reform" of 1965, we have picked up over 35 Million mostly Latino immigrants in addition to what I claim are about 20 million illegals. (My numbers are just as good as John McCain's). For example, California is already OVER 50% Latino. Texas? Florida? With just expected growth of those already here, the US will be at least half-Latino by 2100.

There is not a damn thing wrong with most Latinos. Good people. There is a lot wrong with making the US part of Latin America by the numbers. Of course there is confusion between these two concepts, and many nasty racist elements appear during this debate.

But if the crimes of illegal entry into the United States, and illegal residence here can be forgiven, so can the social crime of bigotry among those who are victims of those criminals. As La Enchiladita points out, bigotry is not exactly unknown among our unwelcome and sometimes very badly behaved invasive "guests."

How do you feel about the preference being given to immigrants from Mexico and Central American countries in preference to other countries of origin?

Unless you live in the District of Columbia, in which case "the blacks" have taken over.

Or unless you live in Miami Beach, in which case "the Jews" have taken over.

Or unless you live in Detroit, in which case "the Muslims" are taking over.

Or unless you live on the East Coast of the United States in 1900, in which case "the foreigners" had taken REALLY over..................In 1900, only 51 percent of the U. S. population was native white and of native parentage (Palen, 1987, p. 210). ..... 1. In eastern seaboard cities such as Boston and New York over 75 percent of the population was of foreign stock (foreign-born or second-generation), (Palen, 1987, p. 210). ...... 2. "By 1890 New York had half as many Italians as Naples, as many Germans as Hamburg, twice as many Irish as Dublin, and two-and-a-half times the number of Jews in Warsaw (Palen, p. 78)."

Throughout American History, one group or the other has been blamed for "taking over" America.

"Hispanics/Latinos/Whatever you want to call them" is a catch-all term that is used to include everbody from the wetback that just swam across the Rio Grande half an hour ago to my uncle, my brother my sister and myself, who, as I noted before, have 48 years of combined military service to America that has included service in the Navy, the Green Berets and the 10th Mountain Division and three combat tours and two Purple Hearts.

Taken all together, as I documented in Post 96, these "Hispanics" compose 14.1% of the U.S. population.

Fourteen percent.

Compare that with the 49% of the U.S. population in 1900 that was "foreign"..........(In 1900, only 51 percent of the U. S. population was native white and of native parentage (Palen, 1987, p. 210).)

Also, as I documented in Post 96, by the third generation, 60% of the "Hispanics" have intermarried themselves out of existance as ethnic group.

My solution to illegal immigration, as outlined in this Post 14 is more draconian that most of the readers on this thread think is possible.

We need to stop the flood of ALL illegal aliens because any UNCONTROLLED flood of foreigners of ANY kind is a detriment to any country and not because "Hispanics" are more of a "threat" to America in 2006 than the "Jews" or the "Itlalians", or the "Poles", or the "Irish" or the "Scandinavians" ot the "Dutch (that's what they called Germans back then), or the "Yellow Peril" (that's what they called the Chinese back then), or the Japanese were a "threat" to America in 1896.