Skip to comments.Bilingual Ballots Are a Bad Idea
Posted on 08/19/2011 5:50:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
At a time when many state and local governments cannot afford even necessary government programs, the Obama administration is about to force hundreds of jurisdictions to waste millions of dollars printing ballots in Spanish and other languages for voters who don't need them. Worse, some of these bilingual ballots may be used fraudulently to encourage people who are not citizens to vote illegally in next year's election.
A perverse element of the Voting Rights Act makes the whole scheme possible, and, unfortunately, not even Republicans have been willing to challenge it.
Under the Act, jurisdictions whose population includes at least 5 percent of voting-age citizens who have limited English proficiency must provide ballots and other voting materials in other languages. Currently, about 500 jurisdictions are required to do so.
I have repeatedly testified before Congress against this provision. As I have argued, there are exceedingly few persons who are actually eligible to vote who can't understand English. English proficiency among U.S.-born Hispanics is virtually universal. And even among naturalized citizens, English proficiency is rarely a problem, since demonstrating English proficiency is required to become a U.S. citizen.
So how is it that so many jurisdictions end up having to provide materials in Spanish, Chinese and other languages, when so few eligible voters really need them?
It has to do with the way the government determines who is English-proficient and who isn't.
The Census Bureau, which is charged under the Voting Rights Act with determining which jurisdictions will be required to print bilingual voting materials, uses a remarkably dubious methodology to determine how many citizens are not proficient in English. Since 1982, the bureau on its census forms has counted those who are members of so-called language minorities and who say they speak English "well" as having limited proficiency. Doing so in 1982 tripled the number of jurisdictions forced to provide bilingual ballots.
In many places, these bilingual materials just sit unused during elections -- a waste of money that could be spent elsewhere. A 1997 General Accounting Office report noted that the printing of bilingual material accounted for half the election costs in those jurisdictions covered. And an earlier GAO study found that in most jurisdictions required to print bilingual materials, not a single person requested them. Could there be a more egregious waste of public funds?
But the greater danger is that unscrupulous groups sometimes use these materials to facilitate voting by non-citizens. As I have testified, multiple instances of voter fraud have involved non-citizens voting -- by using bilingual ballots -- from Hawaii to Georgia.
So what can be done? The best thing would be to repeal the onerous provision -- but not even a Republican-controlled Congress has been willing to take on that fight. Short of repeal, the very least that should be done is stopping the Census Bureau from inflating the number of jurisdictions required to provide bilingual materials based on phony limited-English-proficient numbers.
The current chairmen of the House subcommittees charged with overseeing enforcement of the Voting Rights Act's bilingual provisions have asked the assistant attorney general for civil rights and the head of the bureau to abandon the flawed methodology now being used. In a letter this week, Reps. Trent Franks and Trey Gowdy urged the bureau to adopt the common-sense approach of considering anyone who says they speak English "well" on the Census form as English-proficient.
At least this standard would result in fewer unnecessary bilingual ballots from being printed. But the only way to stop this nonsense is to eliminate the requirement for bilingual voting materials altogether. Furthermore, there is another reason to oppose them: they balkanize our nation.
Our original national motto is "E pluribus unum" -- out of many, one. While we come from all over the globe, we are united as Americans. This unity means that we hold certain things in common. We celebrate the same democratic values, cherish our many freedoms, and champion equality under the law. Our common bonds must also include an ability to communicate with one another through a common language: English.
In our struggling economy, there is no better time than now than to stop wasting money on bilingual ballots.
They don’t want Americans to vote anyway.
Someone needs to sue because of the confusion caused by the unnecessary foreign verbiage on the ballots.
Arabic !! Where’s the Arabic
La Raza Linda Chavez trying to pretend she now wants to defend American culture from the latino onslaught.
I think you may have Linda mixed up with someone else. She has fought bilingual education and for the official public use of English all along.
I choose to communicate by eyeblinks in Morse code. Please hire Morse code wink experts for all the voting locations across the land in case I choose any of them, so my rights will not be disenfranchised. Thank you...wink wink
Emphasis mine. Sameo Sameo.
I don't see the need for bilingual voting ballots. After all, one must be an American Citizen to vote, and in order to become a naturalized citizen one must demonstrate a certain level of literacy and competence in reading and writing the English language, right? I am right aren't I? sarc/
Several States have voter ID laws. Texas passed ours this year, after Governor Perry made it an emergency priority bill.
Agreed. Worse, “identity politics” breeds bigotry and racism.
“I think you may have Linda mixed up with someone else.”
No, I know that La Raza witch all too well. She and her POS assistant John J Miller made a career out of attacking those of us who wanted an end to illegal immigration. Here’s a recent sample:
“Americans abhor extremism. It is the reason our democracy has lasted for more than 200 years and why we have rejected both socialism and right-wing radicalism. American political parties have generally hewed to the center, unlike their European counterparts, so that even major political shifts moved the country only from center right (as in the Reagan and Bush administrations) to center left (as in the current administration). It is a lesson that both parties should take to heart, but one that poses special problems for the Republicans as one group of extremists attempts to hijack the GOP on a single issue: illegal immigration.”
I agree with her on birthright citizenship. It’s a stupid move and one of the few issues on which I disagree with my Representative Lamar Smith. If I were planning on splitting the Republicans on immigration, I’d introduce a bill changing the meaning of he 14th Amendment.
On the other hand, Napolitano’s intention to introduce amnesty should unite us and bring in new conservatives who haven’t identified with us in the past.
Could you be mixing Linda Chavez-Thompson and Linda Chavez-Gerston?
You are correct, except in one special case. Those born in Puerto Rico are citizens upon birth, but English is not the predominant language of the island. Thus Spanish ballots should only be issued to someone born on the island of Puerto Rico. Present proof of Puerto Rican birth and then you can receive a biligual ballot.
English needs to be made the official language. If they can’t read an English ballot, they shouldn’t be voting because they obviously can’t understand the local English news or newspaper and certainly can’t understand what the English speaking candidates are saying. How bleepin’ hard is it to recognize a candidate’s name in English? What, like it suddenly changes spelling in another language??? If you can’t read anything but Arabic or Chinese then how in blazes do you pay the electric bill or drive a car?
They’re all liars and cheats. Back in my young and naive days, I worked for the government which hired supposed US citizens but so many claimed they didn’t understand English. Funny thing was if their paycheck wasn’t there at 4 pm on the dot, they were suddenly fluent in English to come complain to me about it. Again, they’re all liars and cheats.
Heck, I’m even sick of everyday consumer goods being in Spanish.
That's a good start, but I was referring to the fight against foreign-language ballots: Case in point (from BallotPedia):
"The Texas English Language Amendment will not appear on the November 2011 general election ballot in the state of Texas as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment.
The measure was pre-filed with the Texas Legislature before the legislative session started in January 2011. The bill, House Joint Resolution 38, would have made English the official language of the state and would also have required government business to be done in English. It was filed by State Representative Leo Berman, who said that the measure would also make all state documents published in English-only. The bill was filed on November 16, 2010.
The 82nd session of the Texas State Legislature adjourned on May 30, 2011. However, Gov. Rick Perry called a special session of the Texas State Legislature that commenced May 31, 2011 in early June and adjourned June 29, 2011. Eight amendments were proposed during the special session, but none passed. Including this proposal."
If you cannot read English you are likely not eligible to vote and you should not be allowed to vote.
I’m speaking of Linda Chavez-Gerston, who held some minor positions in the Reagan Administration. Whose nomination for Secretary of Labor under Dubya was derailed when her own illegal alien maid became known.
Linda Chavez and her protege over at NRO, John J Miller, have a long career of smearing anti-illegal alien activists. If you want amnesty and a bigger flood of illegal aliens, Linda Chavez is your gal. Don’t be fooled by her token pro-English language posturing.
If you can’t vote in English, you shouldn’t be voting.
Spanish ballots only make it much easier for ACORN & ACCE recruits to vote in elections where they are NOT qualified to vote.
I certainly cannot wait for a serious TEA Party or Republican candidate to be in the White House & NObama perp-walked into prison, along with his minions & czars.
She didn’t have a maid. A friend asked her to help out his friend. She allowed the friend to stay in her house.
She disagrees with FAIR. I do, to in part.I can’t stand a former member of their Board of Directors, former Governor Lamm, the eugenicist. And, as I said, I believe in citizenship birth.
Nevertheless, she is hated by LaRaza and has done more to encourage equal - rather than affirmative - opportunity in the US than you or I.
I just looked up FAIR and NumbersUSA, begun by John Tanton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tanton
If you want to cut the US population by working with killers and eugenicists, NumbersUSA and FAIR are your boys.
If these are the people you believe are smeared, you need to look them up. They are eugenicists and promote death.
John Tanton an anti-Semitic eugenicist, served on the board of Planned Parenthood, helped start many local PP organizations, served as chair of the Population Committee of the Sierra Club, was active in Zero Population Group, counted eugenicists Garrett Hardin and Paul Erlich as friends, and helped start “Earth Day.”
Well, well, well, hocndoc reveals himself to be an SPLC fellow traveller.
Seen all that guilt-by-association crap before pal, although I thought most of your ilk had left for sites where the SPLC’s leftwing smear jobs are the daily diet.
You might as well skip the wikipedia and go right to the source next time you want to trash FAIR, Tanton, and NumbersUSA:
“She didnt have a maid. A friend asked her to help out his friend. She allowed the friend to stay in her house”
‘MARTA MERCADO tidied Linda Chavez’s kitchen and cleaned Linda Chavez’s bathroom and tended Linda Chavez’s dogs and took out Linda Chavez’s trash, but she was not Linda Chavez’s employee.
“Mrs. Linda’s neighbors might have thought I was working for her,” Mercado has been quoted saying. “That was not exactly what was happening.”
Mercado was not an employee because Chavez was not paying her a regular wage, only sporadic sums every few weeks ranging from $60 to $200. That gives rise to the sort of obvious question an FBI agent might ask: Why wasn’t Chavez paying her?
Mercado certainly was in desperate need of money. She had arrived in America with nothing, and she had three daughters in her native Guatemala who depended on her.
Chavez sure had the money to pay Mercado. Chavez is said to have had a six-figure income. She was on the board of directors for Greyhound Bus Lines and ABM Industries. Her husband’s position as head of the Office of Refugee Resettlement certainly paid more than the minimum wage. The couple had enough cash to open the Santa Fe Express restaurant in Gaithersburg, Md., an establishment that surely had no undocumented workers in the kitchen. Their house was worth a half-million dollars.
And, Chavez clearly saw nothing wrong with other people hiring illegal immigrants. Chavez drove Mercado to interviews with those who might want to make her an employee.
Chavez was almost certainly aware that one of her neighbors was paying Mercado some $120 a week for housework. The more you ponder the matter, the more insistent the unanswered question becomes: How could Chavez not pay Mercado a regular wage?
Chavez has maintained that she provided Marcado shelter as part of a “pattern” of charitable good deeds. The suggestion is that Mercado was simply expressing her gratitude when she lent a hand around the house.
However it started out, the arrangement continued as one in which Mercado received a place to live and performed household chores. Chavez could have saved herself the trouble of chauffeuring Mercado around in search of a job by simply paying the woman for work she was already doing in her house. Chavez could hardly have imagined that Mercado did not need the money...
He is a she.
I believe in coalitions and learning to work together for a common goal, even though we may not agree on every issue. I will not knowingly work with eugenicists and abortionists.
So, when I realized that there was more going on than I knew, I did research.
The essay written by Tanton himself in praise of Hardin, in which he describes his history is damning. No guilt by association: frank admission of his own murderous history.
He worked with Ehrlich and Hardin, helping to build up Earth Day, the multiple ties to abortion through Planned Parenthood, and chairing the Population Committee of the Sierra Club mark him as a killer, a promoter of murder.
You absolutely are engaged in guilt by association. Here’s your direct quote, in case it has slipped your mind:
“I just looked up FAIR and NumbersUSA, begun by John Tanton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tanton
If you want to cut the US population by working with killers and eugenicists, NumbersUSA and FAIR are your boys.”
You chose to smear NumbersUSA.
NumbersUSA is “a non-profit, non-partisan immigration-reduction organization.”
Nowhere do they advocate eugenics and killing, yet you choose to lie and say that they do.
You chose to smear FAIR in your post.
FAIR, “The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a national, nonprofit, public-interest, membership organization of concerned citizens who share a common belief that our nation’s immigration policies must be reformed to serve the national interest.”
Nowhere do they advocate eugenics and killing, yet you choose to lie and say that they do.
I’m sure that you do believe in coalitions and working together. And I’m certain that the lefty hatemongers at the SPLC are among those whom you choose to work with.
Not for a second do I buy your claim that you “just looked up” FAIR and NumbersUSA, not when the crap you posted is the same old guilt by association smear the SPLC has been running for years.
There was a regular little cell of SPLC groupies here about 10 years ago, trying to shut down all discussion of immigration using exactly the same smear that you are trying to dredge up once again. It worked for awhile, but the truth finally caught up with their little game just as it will with you.
I gave you my source - the tribute to Garret Hardin written by the founder of FAIR, NumbersUSA, and Centers for Immigration Study, John Tanton.
There’s no doubt that Tanton is a eugenicist or that FAIR and NumbersUSA share many of his values. They are a front for zero population growth.
“Many now recognize the urgency with which we need to halt the human-caused degradation of Earth’s natural environment. “ http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16911&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1009
Look at this list of FAIR Director and Advisory Board member http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/about/board_of_directors.html : John Tanton (PP board of director, founder NumbersUSA, chair Sierra Club Population Committee), Richard Lamm (former Chair, current Advisory Board member, proponent of euthanasia, eventually the elderly will recognize their duty to die), Paul Ehrlich (wrote “The Population Bomb), Sarah G. Epstein (PP board of directors). Hardin was in this group until his death.
NumbersUSA itself refers to Earth Day, Sierra Club, sustainability, human-caused global warming, and environmentalism as support for its position on zero population growth,
Roy Beck focuses on the environment and willingness to practice “Family planning” and “planned parenthood” by religious organizations
Roy Beck writes position papers published by the Centers for Immigration Studies - another Tanton org. - decrying urban sprawl and calling for population control.
John Tanton could well have been a cannibal. It doesn’t matter. That is irrelevant to what FAIR and NumbersUSA are about, something that anyone, even you, can find right on their home pages. They both state prominently that immigration is their concern. Instead you describe them as “killers” and “eugenicists”.
Where is your evidence for that? Well you don’t have any. Evidently you just say whatever pops into your head, truth be damned if the story is good.
Instead of producing the evidence which inconveniently doesn’t exist, you resort (again) to guilt-by-association, linking to statements by Tanton, Lamm, Ehrlich and Beck, statements that aren’t found at either FAIR or NumbersUSA and statements that aren’t endorsed by either group.
Basically, lady, you called FAIR and NumbersUSA “killers” and “eugenicists” and you got caught at it. Instead of retracting that inflammatory poop you chose to double down in it, still trying to get some mileage out of the old guilt by association gambit.
But in your latest post you at least decided to alter your fibbing a little bit. No more “killers” and “eugenicists”, maybe those claims were getting embarrassing even for you, instead we find the milder:
“They are a front for zero population growth.”
Knowing your reputation for honesty I had to ask myself : “Is there even the slightest chance that that claim is true?”
Probably not, but I figured I had better check.
So I looked around NumbersUSA, read their “goals” and read their “issues” and guess what? Not one mention of “zero population growth”. Hunh. Imagine that.
Well, maybe you had simply confused them with FAIR, and I’d be able to find the zero population growth stuff you found over at FAIR’s website. So I read FAIR’s “about us” page, their “mission statement” their “purpose” and their “principles”.
Alas, there was not one mention of zero population growth.
So what are we to conclude? Is that another claim that came out of your fertile and fact-challenged imagination? Or did you actually find either organization talking about zero population growth? Please provide links. I’m sure that you will be able to find something that someone’s brother-in-law said that was a tribute to Hitler that will offer conclusive proof of your various killer, eugenicist, zero population growth claims.
I gave you tons of links in #27.
There’s an entire page devoted to “sustainability” under issues.
How’s this: “Why I am an environmentalist” from NumbersUSA
“”Hell, discussing immigration makes me uncomfortable! I would much rather avoid the topic, particularly among my fellow progressives. More than once, Ive been called a nativist, a xenophobe, a racistnot because of anything objectionable Ive said about any racial or ethnic group, but simply for saying that we should reduce immigration. Who needs it?
“”The answer, I think, is that nature needs it. Nature needs fewer peopleglobally, but also right here, in the United States. “”
The author of this featured essay on NumbersUSA goes on to tell us that America uses too many of of the world’s resources and that the world and nature need fewer Americans.
“I gave you tons of links in #27.”
Not one of which was a link to either FAIR or NumbersUSA. Those links were just more examples of your repeated attempts at guilt-by-association.
“Hows this: Why I am an environmentalist from NumbersUSA”
The answer is found at the end of that essay, in two sentences you conveniently failed to include:
“Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA.”
It’s not a “featured essay” as you claim, it’s a blog. I suppose even you could post a blog there, should they want to risk getting sued for libel.
What’s interesting is that there is a search feature at NumbersUSA, and when you plug in “eugenics” zero results come up. Now that’s fascinating, because it is your claim that the site is all about “killers” and “eugenics”- you do still make those claims, right? I’ve yet to see you withdraw those charges. And I’ve yet to see you post one iota of evidence backing your accusations.
You’ve had time to dig up links to other sites, and time to find one essay by an environmentalist who doesn’t mention killing and/or eugenics. When are you going to produce the evidence to prove your accusations aren’t the gross falsehoods that they appear to be? Isn’t ‘bearing false witness’ frowned upon in your life? Or is that as it appears to be, your SOP?
“Eugenics” and “killers” are your words, the accusations you made. It’s time for you to quit stalling and produce the evidence, produce quotes from FAIR and NumbersUSA where they promote killing and eugenics.
Yep, members of the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood (Tanton and Epstein) are killers and eugenicists. Frank eugenicists (Tanton, Epstein, Ehrlich and Lamb)are eugenicists.
They are on the Board of Directors of FAIR, http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/about/board_of_directors.html then FAIR’s leaders are killers and eugenicists.
(Epstein is on the BOD of Pathfinders International, which her father, Clarence Gamble, started. That group fought the Mexico City rule of Reagan and the Bush’s, advocates international abortions.)
Go back and look at those links in #27. All but two (one written by Tanton and another written by Beck) link directly to FAIR or NumbersUSA. If it’s www.fairus.org or www.numbersusa.com it’s from the FAIR or NumbersUSA website.
“”The key to population stabilization is arriving at a replacement rate of roughly 2.1 births per woman and an immigrant replacement rate equal to the annual emigration rate (roughly 300,000 per year). Americans briefly achieved replacement rate in the early 1970s.””
From FAIR News Article: http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=21533&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1009
“”Achieving Population Stability
Fortunately, population growth can be moderated by legislating and executing appropriate immigration policies. It can also be influenced by programs that address natural change (births less deaths) through promoting family planning efforts to decrease unwanted births.””
“”The key to population stability is arriving at replacement rate fertility (a balance between births and deaths) and zero-net immigration (a balance between immigration and emigration). In fact, Americans did achieve replacement rate fertility in the early 1970s. “”
As to the blog,”Why I am an environmentalist,” which declares that “the world needs fewer Americans,” https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/cafarop/april-21-2010/why-i-am-environmentalist-immigration-reduction.html it’s the NumbersUSA blog. Cafaro is one of NumbersUSA’s authors.
Just above the line you quoted is this statement:
“”NumbersUSA’s blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.””
You still haven’t produced a single quote backing up your charge that FAIR and NumbersUSA are killers and eugenicists.
Of course it’s because there are no such quotes, your accusations are nothing more than baseless slander. And you’ve demonstrated that you’re not honest enough to admit it and withdraw it. You just offer up more links, not one of which mentions eugenics much less killing, and try to pass them off as if they do.
I’m not interested in all the red herrings and straw men you’ve been dredging up to try to deflect the subject away from your accusation that FAIR and NumbersUSA are eugenicists who advocate killing. I knew you were in a hole when I read your first post, I just wanted to see how long you would keep digging. Apparently you are sufficiently proud and shameless to go at indefinitely.
If you’re on the board of Planned Parenthood, you’re a killer and eugenicist. Who needs quotes?
Diana Hull, PhD, another FAIR Advisory Board member, admiringly quoted Garrett (the former FAIR Board member and eugenicist who committed suicide with his wife when he got sick) for his “challenge to that “intuitive ideal” about the sanctity of life - when we should be “sanctifying” sustainability - which is the only policy that can give us a future.”
“If youre on the board of Planned Parenthood, youre a killer and eugenicist. Who needs quotes?”
Well you do, since Planned Parenthood wasn’t the target of your “killers” and “eugenicists” accusation.
FAIR and NumbersUSA were your targets, and you need to provide quotes from those organizations advocating killing and eugenics.
When you make the charges that you do, and then fail to produce any evidence backing them up, then what are we to conclude? That you have access to unseen evidence the rest of us don’t get to see? Or that you’re irresponsible, make unfounded charges, and then try to employ guilt by association to justify your false accusations?
You post a tribute by Diana Hull to her late friend Garrett Hardin on a website dedicated to him, and then claim that her personal view represents FAIR. Evidently any group that Hull belongs to will be tainted by her personal views. Or to take another tack from your guilt by association schema, if some other FAIR board member has published a tribute to the Pope then FAIR is Catholic as well. That’s logic, hocnspit style.
Again, if the Board of Directors and Advisory Board are eugenicists and killers, FAIR is led by killers and eugenicists. I only looked up a few of these people and found 8/10 who actively promote death by abortion and eugenics.
Do you now admit that all of those links to www.fairus.org and www.numbersusa.com are, indeed to FAIR and to NumbersUSA?
Click past the home page of either FAIRus.org or NumbersUSA.com and you find reference after reference to Earth Day, global warming, protecting species other than humans, population control, sustainability, population committees, replacement level fertility.
If you look up the people who head the organizations, you find Planned Parenthood Directors and other promoters of abortion and people like Richard Lamm who believes that some of us have a duty to die and Paul Ehrlich, the author of “The Population Bomb.”
Now, if y’all want to fight abortion and eugenics, here’s a good place to be:
Who knew that the anti-immigration FAIR and NumbersUSA are a nest of Planned Parenthood directors and eugenicists? They were both started by James Tanton, who also founded several chapters of PP. Their Board of Directors has included Paul Ehrlich (”The Population Bomb”), Governor Lamm (the elderly have a duty to die) and various other pro-aborts, Earth-First, and eugenicists.
Yep, members of the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood (Tanton and Epstein) are killers and eugenicists. Frank eugenicists (Tanton, Epstein, Ehrlich and Lamb)are eugenicists.
They are on the Board of Directors of FAIR, http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/about/board_of_directors.html then FAIRs leaders are killers and eugenicists.
(Epstein is on the BOD of Pathfinders International, which her father, Clarence Gamble, started. That group fought the Mexico City rule of Reagan and the Bushs, advocates international abortions.)
There’s also Diana Hull, PhD, who admiringly quoted a challenge to that intuitive ideal about the sanctity of life - when we should be sanctifying sustainability - which is the only policy that can give us a future.
“You still havent produced a single quote backing up your charge that FAIR and NumbersUSA are killers and eugenicists.”
Actually, yes he has. Sustainability is the direct extension of Planned parenthood and Ehrich’s population bomb. They see population growth as a bad thing, when in fact, it’s the hallmark of American exceptionalism.
Did you know about this nest of abortionists and eugenicists at FAIR and NumbersUSA: James Tanton, Paul Ehrlich, Richard Lamm, Sarah Gamble Epstein, Susan Hull, etc.?
There are actually 2 websites for NumbersUSA: numbersusa.com and numbersusa.org
The .com lists Richard Lamm as a supporter
Then, on .org, there’s Don Weeden, on the Board of Directors of NumbersUSA http://www.numbersusa.org/about/directors and founder of “Apply the Brakes,” who says,
“Reproduction: After a period of slow growth during the years of the Great Depression and World War II, U.S. population started booming due to a expansion in the fertility rate to about three and a half births per woman. The environmental movement of the day called for reduction in fertility and as a result of many factors, the rate had fallen off to below replacement level of 1.7 births per woman by the time of the first Earth Day in 1970. Our current fertility rate of 2.1 is at replacement level, but is still 50% higher than the 1.4 rate of the developed nations of Europe and Japan. The U.S. Congress does not seek voluntary reduction in fertility. To the contrary, it supports incentives for larger family size.”
“What The Country Really Needs.....
What the country really needs is a population stabilization policy, guided by critical thinking and analysis. This policy should include efforts to significantly reduce the country’s fertility rate (closer to the European average of 1.4 children). We could start by proactively addressing our relatively high number of unintended pregnancies. Additionally, U.S. population stabilization efforts should be coupled with big increases in foreign aid, including family planning, and energetic campaigns to - at the minimum - halve U.S. per capita consumption as soon as possible.”
I had heard these things before, and have always steered clear of those organizations because of it.
Very good post, though.
Ballots should not be bilingual. English-speakers will just have to deal with the language of Aztlán. I can't wait for the day (O 'bout 10 years, I'd say) when we can replace this precedent-setting President with a candidate born to two illegal aliens. He will undoubtedly take the oath on a copy of Che Guevara's Autobiography.
Say, this Rubio fellow ought to make a good transition: he was born to two LEGAL aliens. It would really get people over this Constitutional hangup with Article II.
Sorry to ping you to this nest of idiocy. It’s bad enough dealing with it when it comes from the usual suspects on the Left.
“Actually, yes he has.”
Fine, then you should be able to produce a quote from either group that advocates killing and eugenics. So far she has only produced a series of guilt by association arguments. In logic those arguments are known as Association Fallacies, not Association ‘Proofs’. If you want to employ association fallacies to make your case then good luck.
On a different note, the popularity of the phrase “American exceptionalism” is certainly curious. I’ve read conservative magazines since 1976 and conservative books going back much further. I never saw anyone using the phrase “American exceptionalism” until maybe the last 5 years, if that long, and now it’s constantly repeated. I’ll bet Ronald Reagan never used the phrase once in any of his speeches.
It’s from a fellow named de Toqueville, perhaps you have heard of him.
“then you should be able to produce a quote from either group that advocates killing and eugenics.”
Sustainability is sufficient proof. The principle of sustainability states that human beings should be restricted to 2.1 children per family, such that the population remains stable. This is to be acheived through population control.
There’s quite a few books out there that talk about this connection. If you are interested in reading more, let me know.