Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Good Anaylsis: "Baby Gap: How birthrates color the electoral map"
The American Conservative ^

Posted on 12/04/2004 6:03:48 AM PST by Uncledave

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last
To: Regulator

"Help, help, I'm being oppressed." :P


61 posted on 12/04/2004 11:44:47 AM PST by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave

"Massachusetts’s whites are failing to replace themselves, averaging only 1.6 babies per woman, and the state’s liberal Democrats are probably reproducing even less than that. "

One has to assume that's because lesbians and gays don't typically have a lot of kids.

I hope the GoP and Pres. Bush realize that the hispanic vote (and plenty of illegals voted, don't think they didn't- 8 of the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote according to Rep. Hayworth) did not win this election, poor whites did.

From an earlier post:



http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1287842/posts
AP..11.24.04
Among other statistics in the report:

-- Births to unmarried mothers rose slightly.

-- Women of Hispanic origin had the highest birth rate, 96.9 per 1,000 women, compared to the overall rate of 66.1. (remember, this overall rate has the low white birthrate figured in)


62 posted on 12/04/2004 11:48:11 AM PST by AuntB (Every person who enters the U.S. illegally--from anywhere--increases the likelihood of another 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #63 Removed by Moderator

To: sinanju
But banishing illegals and keeping out "low-income" people and anti-development mania get conflated in the author's mind

I live in Northern California and I can tell you that his analysis of the difference in what happened between Northern and Southern California is quite accurate. It is still happening: in Santa Cruz county, the citizens just voted down a measure to widen Highway 1, which would help mitigate the massive jams we have now.

Why? Because they rightly perceive that improving the infrastructure will only invite more people to move here, regardless of race or nationality, and the problem will only return. So they figure that they'll live with the current catastrophe, and not give it a chance to get worse.

I disagree: I think if the immigration laws had been enforced, we could widen our roads without having to worry that another million Mexicans will appear overnight to set up camp. It's their way of having their cake and eating it too: they don't overtly condemn Mexican illegal immigration, they just erect unseen barriers like lack of infrastructure, zoning density laws, housing permit requirements which are impossible to meet, etc. which drive up prices and make it difficult for unskilled laborers to move in. Sidenote: it won't work in the long run, because eventually, ethnic agitators and other Democrats will agitate for required low income housing in developments (as just happened in Sacramento County), or outright "public" housing projects to house the illegals (which is already the case in majority Mexican parts of Santa Cruz and Monterey County, i.e., Watsonville and Salinas).

He's simply pointing out that that in Los Angeles, it didn't happen that way. LA simply kept building out, with illegals congregating in the urban core and whites (and blacks, interestingly enough) simply moving to the periphery or out of state alltogether. And the theory is that LA did not have the same "no-growth" attitude, and what it looks like now is the result of that. It may not be the only reason (industries willing to hire unskilled, illegal alien workers being another, as you point out), but it certainly is one of the reasons, and a big one at that.

64 posted on 12/04/2004 12:32:29 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

65 posted on 12/04/2004 12:47:29 PM PST by Smartass (BUSH & CHENEY to 2008 Si vis pacem, para bellum - Por el dedo de Dios se escribió)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Constantine XIII
Help, help, I'm being oppressed!

Oh no, quick call Kofi Annan!

66 posted on 12/04/2004 2:22:41 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: everyone

This article is dead on the money. One of the best political analyses I've seen this year.


67 posted on 12/04/2004 2:29:27 PM PST by California Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

So I'm a liberal because I'm not a racist? Or is it because I'm not a Buchananite protectionist? You know, I'd have some interest in discussing the merits of the article with you - and it has its merits as well as its faults - if I thought you were capable of something more than name-calling, but you're clearly not. Take some advice from Dick Cheney and go f*** yourself, racist.


68 posted on 12/04/2004 2:53:49 PM PST by xjcsa (If you can toss ridiculous insults, I can toss ridiculous insults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

That line stuck out at me too. Why is it that many writers these days (on all sides) like to pepper their commentary with wild overstatements?

Honestly, the author lost a bit of cred with me with that line. And cred is something a writer can not afford to lose, you know?


69 posted on 12/04/2004 3:00:16 PM PST by HitmanLV (HitmanNY has a brand new Blog!! Please Visit! - http://www.goldust.com/weblog -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave

What about hispanic and black babies. I hazard that the hispanic baby production is way way above white baby production.


70 posted on 12/04/2004 3:06:56 PM PST by mlmr (Rubbing it in Leftist faces since 1994)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xjcsa
Take some advice from Dick Cheney and go f*** yourself, racist

So now you have delusions of grandeur? You're really channeling the Vice-President? How laughable.

Like I said, liberal, you're the only one who interpreted the article that way. And the reason is because you simply react to any mention of immigration or caucasians with the standard liberal theology, which is that both of those subjects cannot be discussed except under the two assumptions: Immigration good, caucasians bad.

That's the dominant leftist orthodoxy, and you're so deep in it, you ain't never coming back. Must've been that public school "education", right?

And the little swear words are sooooo scary. You musta made the keys bounce.

71 posted on 12/04/2004 4:53:06 PM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave; 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; axel f; ...

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

72 posted on 12/04/2004 5:08:43 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (A Freelance Business Writer looking for business.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Regulator
Well, I don't usually like socializing with racist liars, so I'll keep this short. First, I was not the only one who "interpreted the article that way", and you know it, since you responded to sinanju's post here. As a matter of fact, if you had reponded to my comment intelligently, instead of stupidly calling me a liberal, my response to you would probably have looked like sinanju's response here. As it is, I owe you nothing; I have no interest in debating liars or racists.
73 posted on 12/04/2004 5:38:50 PM PST by xjcsa (If you can toss ridiculous insults, I can toss ridiculous insults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: spodefly

LOL


74 posted on 12/04/2004 7:15:56 PM PST by Uncledave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Great Prophet Zarquon
(a nativist, white-supremacist, immigrationophobic, and indeed xenophobic cesspit)

Shouldn't you be citing Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center when you're using their material?

75 posted on 12/04/2004 7:41:18 PM PST by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Coleus,Bump.


76 posted on 12/04/2004 10:00:52 PM PST by fatima (Pray for our troops.I voted for tomkow6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Uncledave

A little anecdotal evideince: My wife and I are currently at 2.9 children (#3 is due any day now) and both of us voted for Bush.


77 posted on 12/04/2004 10:14:07 PM PST by Antoninus (Santorum in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

Great graphic! Thanks!


78 posted on 12/04/2004 10:31:41 PM PST by BIGLOOK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

I'm no liberal, and I agree with a lot of criticism of the black community that would get me in a heep of trouble with race baiters, but I'm pretty sure that articles from Vdare are banned on this site due to their attitudes on race.


79 posted on 12/04/2004 10:37:02 PM PST by Dat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK

You're welcome!


80 posted on 12/05/2004 7:39:30 AM PST by TenthAmendmentChampion (Click on my name to see what readers have said about my Christian novels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson