Just Because the Circus Is in Town
Doesn’t Mean We Have to Vote for the Clown
Give what you can
Or donate monthly, and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
Save Lazamataz! He’s fading fast!
Posted on 04/29/2011 7:47:51 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer
At a gathering some years ago, I had a political conversation with a man who had recently arrived here from Denmark. He was advocating his home country's socialist system, which, of course, led to profound disagreement. He was good natured and cordial, however, so the debate ended on a polite note. Yet it also ended on an ironic one: When asked if he wanted to return home, his answer was no.
This is a common phenomenon. We see it, for instance, in liberal northerners who move to the South for the lower taxes and cost of living and greater freedom but then continue to vote for the kind of politicians who made the Northeast a nice place to leave. And while this befuddles many, it's simply man's nature. Of course people want that which is good, such as a better lifestyle, but wanting and attaining are two different things. Everyone wants good health, for example, but many nevertheless are too attached to unhealthful foods and practices to relinquish them. Oh, they might move into your healthy body if they could, but they would likely do to it what a government — subsidized project does to a good neighborhood.
Now, there is a reason why I'm talking about how a change in location doesn't equate to a change in ideology. In the Financial Times recently, Richard McGregor reported on the latest population data, writing:
The electorate has become less white and more Hispanic more rapidly than predicted, according to the national census, two trends that will influence elections for decades.
...Mr Obama and the Democrats have long had a significant lead among minority voters, [and these demographic changes are] lifting their chances of taking states such as Nevada, Georgia and Arizona [which were] lost in 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
Government should not be in the "jobs" business and it should not be in the "charity" business. The federal government should wage war, run the courts, run the mail service, and (perhaps) do 1 or 2 other things. We aren't going back there by cutting $38B at a time.
Home.
FYI, most hispanics in the US are white. The real danger here is acquiescing to the Marxist liberal constructs and terminology, his first being the division of people into groups and pitting them one against the other.
No, but they don't stop voting either.
(In both places!)
Rimshot!
Enjoy the veal!..............
Post of the day!
They are not fleeing socialism or the failed ideology.
They simply flee funding it.
****************************************
Well said.
In all cultures, at least all cultures that seek to preserve themselves,
immigration is limited to the rate of assimilation.
The left is intentionally overdriving the assimilation,
because they don’t like our culture and think it deserves to be destroyed.
Controlling debt is no longer academic but a question of national survival. Unfortunately, history tells us that neither the public nor our politicians will have the fortitude to accept the necessary hardships until the entire system collapses. Even then, reversing the trend toward totalitarianism is unlikely, so long as the mass media is willing to shill for those promoting facism.
These guys kept the borders wide open for twenty years and practically bribed millions of Third world "immigrants" to come here with jobs, free health care, free education, free housing, etc. Of course the demographics have changed. That was the whole point!
For those demographics (not sure about Asians) I’d agree.
However, that consitutes less than 50% of our immigrants.
Really, we should first get a handle on the illegal problem, then:
1. Approve only enough immigrants to have a net 1% annual population growth once births and deaths are considered.
2. Approve immigrants in order of preference from the following regions, from most to least preferred:
1. English-speaking countries, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Britain, etc.
2. Non-English Speaking European countries (Italy, Russia, etc)
3. Non-European countries with reasonably non-corrupt democratic or pro-Western governments (Japan, India, Israel, etc)
4. The rest (China, Mexico, Arab states, etc)
Approve based on following personal attributes in order of preference:
1. College educated
2. High School Educated
3. Uneducated/less than high school
This would solve 90% of the problems associated with immigration. Sure, most educated Eurotwits are leftist, but at least they won’t need welfare in most cases and at least some can be politically persuaded.
Is it racist? No, just realist. I’d take a Nigerian doctor over an illiterate Mexican border-jumper or our own homegrown, illiterate white union-raised idiot any day of the week.
“They are not fleeing socialism or the failed ideology.
They simply flee funding it.”
Exactly, they want the benefits without the bill. The 40+% that pay no taxes.
It’s largely the illegals who want the gravy train and vote ‘rat.
“I notice that you did NOT include northern/western/southern Europeans and Hispanics. How about them?”
I mentioned Cubans, who are Hispanics the last I checked. Most other Hispanics and most N/W/S Europeans have been corrupted with welfare states or feudal patronage systems which are simply an earlier, agricultural form of command economy. What is interesting to me is that those who come from socialist backgrounds tend to remain socialist and dependent in their thinking. Those who came from hard communist nations of origin tend to embrace freedom and opportunity with all their hearts. Thus the difference between many of the Cubans and many of the other Latins.
“I will concede though that a big sudden surge in Hispanics would tend to give the Democrats the short-term edge.”
I agree with you. This is largely due to the fact that the clever ruling class types who actually dominate the GOP are apathetic or even hostile to conservative social and family values. That is where they could make headway with Latins.
Illegals are another matter entirely. They are by definition scofflaws, and natural grist for the mill of the party and population which is lawless.
I think your list is sound.
A Democrat future means a strict adherence to political correctness, high taxes and totalitarian government dressed up as “Democracy”.
How many hardcore-Texan types would stand for that?
Yes, your plan would undoubtedly be labeled racist by the Left (mainstream media, Democrats, professional ethnic grievance groups, Hollywood) and WSJournal/Bush-style republicans.
Any reduction in legal immigration, which the nation desperately needs, would result in fewer non-white immigrants, therefore those advocating it will face demagoguery and demonization on a stunning level. This will happen no matter how many times pathetic, futile, Hannity-like “I don’t care about race” prefaces are offered.
But that is where America, and indeed all of the West finds itself.
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.