Skip to comments.Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 6 May 2012
Posted on 05/06/2012 4:51:31 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
May 6th, 2012
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Vice President Joe Biden; Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.; Sen. Chuck U. Schumer, D-N.Y.; former Gov. Howard Dean, D-Vt.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.; David Assholerod, adviser to President Barack Obamas re-election campaign.
STATE OF THE UNION (CNN): Gingrich; Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.; former Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va.; former Gov. Ted Strickland, D-Ohio.
I had high hopes for that thread and am glad that Jim has at least agreed not to ban Romney supporters.
But the thread itself was really depressing.
Too many people living in a dream world and basically on the path to elect Obama.
I could be wrong but I remember reading Rubio’s parents had applied but were not naturalized at the time of is birth. Of course, since the media has given a pass to 0 it would be hard for them to complain about it, but they will.
Amen, bray. Thank you for the essays you post here every Sunday. And thank you for being a good person, never nasty.
It’s really appreciated here.
“We could use a woman like her” AMEN!!
Thanks for common sense and a rational point of view.
A poster here who shall not be named loves to come up with horrific facts and figures but proposes no solutions.
Other posters say the borders can’t be closed.
The borders can be closed and I agree with you about self-deportation. In fact, we may all be tempted to self deport if Obama gets back in.
There are solutions to the illegal problem. We just need leadership to do it and arguing about it won’t solve it.
They are too afraid of not being re-elected! That’s more important than the country.
Wow! Sarkozy lost in France. They’ve elected a pure socialist. A little while, and France will be the new Greece. Austerity (and reality) throw in the towel! Germany cannot save Europe, then.
France has a huge Communist party. The French people have been down the socialist road before (when times were easier) and I am sure they think that electing a socialist will bring back the good times.
Well, are they in for a surprise. Germany won’t work with them if they insist on their stupid spending, and pretty soon the money will stop flowing their way. It would not surprise me to find out that Sarkozy was a target of Soros.
All I can tell you is that I am going to England at the end of the month, but I am NOT going to France. And it is time to stop buying French wine again.
Besides the fact that Hispanic was an artifically contrived classification that was developed for a number of reasons, including creating another victim class that could have benefits conferred on them such as affirmative action and minority business set asides, we are having a real problem in assimilation in this country. Language is one of the factors that can affect how well an immigrant assimilates into this culture.
Professor Huntington of Harvard wrote a great article in Foreign Affairs (2004), The Hispanic Challenge that is well worth the read even today. His point about language is on the mark. It is pertinent because Hispanics comprise 16% of the population today, up from 1% in 1970 and they will be a third of the US population by 2050 according the Bureau of the Census. Immigrantion and birthrates will ensure that result.
"The persistent inflow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures, and two languages. Unlike past immigrant groups, Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclavesfrom Los Angeles to Miamiand rejecting the Anglo-Protestant values that built the American dream. The United States ignores this challenge at its peril."
"The size, persistence, and concentration of Hispanic immigration tends to perpetuate the use of Spanish through successive generations. The evidence on English acquisition and Spanish retention among immigrants is limited and ambiguous. In 2000, however, more than 28 million people in the United States spoke Spanish at home (10.5 percent of all people over age five), and almost 13.8 million of these spoke English worse than very well, a 66 percent increase since 1990. According to a U.S. Census Bureau report, in 1990 about 95 percent of Mexican-born immigrants spoke Spanish at home; 73.6 percent of these did not speak English very well; and 43 percent of the Mexican foreign-born were linguistically isolated. An earlier study in Los Angeles found different results for the U.S.-born second generation. Just 11.6 percent spoke only Spanish or more Spanish than English, 25.6 percent spoke both languages equally, 32.7 percent more English than Spanish, and 30.1 percent only English. In the same study, more than 90 percent of the U.S.-born people of Mexican origin spoke English fluently. Nonetheless, in 1999, some 753,505 presumably second-generation students in Southern California schools who spoke Spanish at home were not proficient in English."
"Spanish retention is also bolstered by the overwhelming majorities (between 66 percent and 85 percent) of Mexican immigrants and Hispanics who emphasize the need for their children to be fluent in Spanish. These attitudes contrast with those of other immigrant groups. The New Jersey-based Educational Testing Service finds a cultural difference between the Asian and Hispanic parents with respect to having their children maintain their native language. In part, this difference undoubtedly stems from the size of Hispanic communities, which creates incentives for fluency in the ancestral language. Although second- and third-generation Mexican Americans and other Hispanics acquire competence in English, they also appear to deviate from the usual pattern by maintaining their competence in Spanish. Second- or third-generation Mexican Americans who were brought up speaking only English have learned Spanish as adults and are encouraging their children to become fluent in it. Spanish-language competence, University of New Mexico professor F. Chris Garcia has stated, is the one thing every Hispanic takes pride in, wants to protect and promote.
Perhaps equally important, business groups seeking to corner the Hispanic market support bilingualism as well. Indeed, the orientation of U.S. businesses to Hispanic customers means they increasingly need bilingual employees; therefore, bilingualism is affecting earnings. Bilingual police officers and firefighters in southwestern cities such as Phoenix and Las Vegas are paid more than those who only speak English. In Miami, one study found, families that spoke only Spanish had average incomes of $18,000; English-only families had average incomes of $32,000; and bilingual families averaged more than $50,000. For the first time in U.S. history, increasing numbers of Americans (particularly black Americans) will not be able to receive the jobs or the pay they would otherwise receive because they can speak to their fellow citizens only in English.
"In the debates over language policy, the late California Republican Senator S.I. Hayakawa once highlighted the unique role of Hispanics in opposing English. Why is it that no Filipinos, no Koreans object to making English the official language? No Japanese have done so. And certainly not the Vietnamese, who are so damn happy to be here. They're learning English as fast as they can and winning spelling bees all across the country. But the Hispanics alone have maintained there is a problem. There [has been] considerable movement to make Spanish the second official language.
"If the spread of Spanish as the United States' second language continues, it could, in due course, have significant consequences in politics and government. In many states, those aspiring to political office might have to be fluent in both languages. Bilingual candidates for president and elected federal positions would have an advantage over English-only speakers. If dual-language education becomes prevalent in elementary and secondary schools, teachers will increasingly be expected to be bilingual. Government documents and forms could routinely be published in both languages. The use of both languages could become acceptable in congressional hearings and debates and in the general conduct of government business. Because most of those whose first language is Spanish will also probably have some fluency in English, English speakers lacking fluency in Spanish are likely to be and feel at a disadvantage in the competition for jobs, promotions, and contracts."
Now, it may be that you and others here are not anti-Hispanic, but dont tell me there arent a portion of people who ARE, and they are on both sides of the aisle. We just had police called in to a gang fight at one of the high schools between blacks and Hispanics.
The Left has been very successful in making anti-illgal immigrant into anti Hispanic and then blurring the line between legal and illegal immigrant. Blacks and Hispanics have been at odds with another because they are competing for the same jobs and political position. They share many common characteristics that don't bode well for the formation of a permanent underclass. Hispanics have an out of wedlock birthrate of 50% topped only by the black rate of 71%. Hispanics have school drop out rates of over 50% with blacks coming in second as a group this is the social pathology for failure in our society. The unemployment rate (BLS for April) for blacks is 13% and for Hispanics 10.1%.
Educational attainment among Hispanics remains very low. Just 10% of foreign-born and 13.5% of native Latinos have finished college, placing the group's completion rate at about a third of the national average.
If people really were serious about this issue then why didnt the GOP accept the guest worker program President Bush put forth? This issue has been hijacked by people who are not interested in a solution and are simply stirring the bad feeling.
First, we already have a large guest worker program that has close to two million people here on temporary work visas. Here is a list of all the various work visas permitted for entry into the US.
Second, do we really need more guest workers at a time when 22 million Americans are looking for full time employment? Is There a Shortage of Skilled Foreign Workers?
Third, we bring in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year. 25% of the adults lack even a high school education. Do we need more high school dropouts in this country. We just had the biggest number of immigrants in the decade ending in 2010, yet the decade experienced a net loss of jobs. Our immigration policy is not bringing in the kinds of immigrants we want or in the numbers we want.
Finally, we are bringing in 125,000 legal foreign workers a month now that includes permanent immigrants and those here on temporary work permits. We created 119,000 jobs last month.
The rest could become permanent legal residents without citizenship privileges.
What kind of message does that send to the 3 million intending legal immigrants waiting their turn to enter overseas? They have completed the required paperwork, background checks, and physicals.
Do you really believe we could create a permanent legal class of residents of this country who could never become citizens despite paying taxes, SS, serving in the military, etc. It would never pass constitutional muster. And why should we reward illegality?
Conservatives are fond of saying the liberals are the ones who make decisions on emotions, but I havent seen evidence of much rationality on the conservative side over the last 6 years. Either the premise is wrong, or we have a lot of people who are not conservatives here. Take your choice.
What I am truly amazed at is how ill-informed most Americans are about the immigration issue, which I believe is the defining issue of our time.
Immigration, legal and illegal, has had and will continue to have a major and far-reaching impact across a broad spectrum of existential challenges that confront this nation, e.g., national security, the economy/global competitiveness, jobs, health care, taxes, energy independence, education, entitlement reform, law enforcement, social welfare programs, physical infrastructure, the environment, civil liberties, and a continued sense of national identity/shared sense of endeavor. Immigration policy is the defining issue of our time with enormous implications for the future of this nation and the preservation of our patrimony. Changes to our existing immigration policies should be an integral part of the solutions to our problems. Yet, rarely will you read or hear immigration policy linked to these challenges by the political and media elites. Instead, legal immigration has become the third rail of American politicsfor Republicans only.
Malkin wrote a book on immigration some time ago. She understands the issue far better than most conservatives as does Pat Buchanan who has taken plenty of heat for this views. Those of us who are actively involved in the issue are used to being called nativists, racists, and bigots. But facts are facts. Unless we have an immigration policy that serves the interests of this nation, we will continue to be transformed into a far different nation, which no longer shares the vision and values of our Founders.
The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 90 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born.
Currently, 1.6 million legal and illegal immigrants settle in the country each year; 350,000 immigrants leave each year, resulting in a net immigration of 1.25 million. Since 1970, the U.S. population has increased from 203 million to 310 million, i.e., over 100 million. In the next 40 years, the population will increase by an additional 130 million to 440 million. Three-quarters of the increase in our population since 1970 and the projected increase will be the result of immigration. The U.S., the worlds third most populous nation, has the highest annual rate of population growth of any developed country in the world, i.e., 0.963% (2011 estimate,) principally due to immigration.
The nations immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 40 million in 2010, the highest number in our history. The U.S. immigrant population has doubled since 1990, nearly tripled since 1980, and quadrupled since 1970, when it stood at 9.7 million. Of the 40 million immigrants in the country in 2010, 13.9 million arrived in 2000 or later making it the highest decade of immigration in American history, even though there was a net loss of jobs during the decade. Growth in the immigrant population has primarily been driven by high levels of legal immigration. Roughly three-fourths of immigrants in the country are here legally. With nearly 12 million immigrants, Mexico was by far the top immigrant-sending country, accounting for 29 percent of all immigrants and 29 percent of growth in the immigrant population from 2000 to 2010.
87 percent of the 1.2 million legal immigrants entering annually are minorities as defined by the U.S. Government and almost all of the illegal aliens are minorities. By 2019 half of the children 18 and under in the U.S. will be classified as minorities and by 2039, half of the residents of this country will be minorities. Generally, immigrants and minorities vote predominantly for the Democrat Party. Hence, Democrats view immigration as a never-ending source of voters that will make them the permanent majority party.
57% of immigrant headed households with children use at least one major welfare program. Milton Friedman said that, You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state. We have both.
Republicans must take the lead on the initiation of a dialogue with the American people on immigration. The status quo is not an option because the demographic changes wrought by immigration will slowly strangle the Republican Party and an amnesty will just hasten the process putting the final nail in the coffin of this country and the GOP. Americans should have an opportunity to decide whether our immigration policies are to serve the long-term interests of all Americans or the short-term interests of corporate and special (often political, religious and ethnic) interest groups. Legal immigration is a controllable variable that can be adjusted in the national interest if we have the political will to do so. And illegal immigration can be stopped and reversed if we as a nation make a resolute commitment to secure our borders and enforce our existing laws.
Agreed. Immigration to America is a privilege, not a right. And we must have an immigration policy that serves the interests of this country. We will never be able to absorb the billions of people who want to come here. We have to set limits and bring in those people who can best make this nation competitive in the global economy. We don’t need to import poverty and high school dropouts. We have plenty of both at home.
Advocate a pro-immigrant policy of low immigration.
Conservatives need to provide the American people with their own comprehensive immigration reform plan, i.e., give people a reason to vote FOR something rather than just attack the other sides proposals. Such a plan should contain the following elements:
Formulate a merit based immigration system that brings in the skills and talents to keep us competitive in the global economy;
Reduce immigration levels based on need more closely approximating 300,000 a year vice the current 1.2 million;
Eliminate extended chain migration, i.e., family reunification, limiting it to the nuclear family, and the Diversity Visa lottery program;
Secure the border;
Enforce existing immigration laws to reduce the current illegal alien population and limit future illegal immigration, i.e., attrition thru enforcement. Enforcement would include: (1) ending the job magnet; (2) increasing coordination at the federal level by eliminating barriers to information sharing among agencies; (3) leveraging state and local enforcement resources; (4) fully implementing the US-VISIT Program to track and deport visa overstays; and (5) make mandatory and improve such programs as E-Verify and 287 [g] authority to assist employers and law enforcement in identifying illegal aliens;
Eliminate birthright citizenship;
Ensure that anyone who enters this nation illegally is not rewarded by being permitted to stay and work here; i.e., no amnesty;
Streamline the processing and adjudication of immigration cases;
Promote pro-immigrant measures that help newcomers assimilate and embrace the values and principles of our Founders and the Constitution.
Politicians who speak the truth and recommend tough solutions will be defeated.
Well, thank you for posting that extremely long and condescending reply.
I really am not getting into a huge discussion with you. Since you used to work for the State Department you have access to a wealth of statistics that I do not.
But regardless of whether Michelle Malkin is an expert or not (and you REALLY want to bring up Pat Buchanan?) I will tell you that she is becoming increasingly vitriolic on television and she DID encourage the anti-Mexican/Peruvian/Honduran/Brazilian/ Colombian/ Venezuelan/Dominican/Chilean etc. faction to make racist comments locally, and our idiotic local talk-show host never stopped it and in fact encouraged it. (Sorry for listing all of the countries. I didn’t want to use that “contrived” word - Hispanic.)
So basically, your advice is to have a DIALOGUE. Wow. That’s some solution! Let’s all just TALK about it for another 10 years.
Pfft. I may not be some super-sophisticated State Department veteran, but we need action, not talk.
Adios, amigo! (That there is Spanish, or “Hispanic” talk.)
Well good on you. Many of us are anti-immigrant even though the vast majority of us sprung from immigrants. Just type it out and boom, it becomes truth. Of course it couldn't be you meant the majority of us were anti-ILLEGAL immigrants, perish the thought.
Fine. You have the last word.
Have a nice evening.
The French are like the hard left here they expect to siphon everything they need off the producers who are capitalists yet they embrace socialism. Go figure.
Not to have a competition to get only the best of those people who would immigrate here is insane.
Okay, you have a plan and a good one.
But is anybody working for this?
And how likely is it that a plan like that could be effected when we can’t even keep illegals out now.
I was thinking more of a simple, doable plan.
But I guess high goals are good.
Fine if you want to take it that way. I just find people who take this mantle of moral superiority on the issue of immigration to be uninformed and insulting. They are the ones who are truly condescending.
But regardless of whether Michelle Malkin is an expert or not (and you REALLY want to bring up Pat Buchanan?)
Have you read their books on the immigration issue? Pat Buchanan has been particularly prescient going back over many years. Demography is destiny. Immigration is part of the Dems electoral strategy to make they the permanent majority party. They are well on their way. California has the demographics that the US will have in 2050. States like Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, NM, and eventually Texas will turn purple and then blue. I could provide links to various studies by Jim Gimple of the University of Maryland on the issue of the electoral consequences of immigration, but I doubt you would read them.
So basically, your advice is to have a DIALOGUE. Wow. Thats some solution! Lets all just TALK about it for another 10 years.
Perhaps you didn't see my plan on how to deal with the immigration issue point by point. I addressed it to you and altura. It is far more than DIALOGUE. And it can be implemented immediately if we had someone receptive in the WH.
Adios, amigo! (That there is Spanish, or Hispanic talk.)
LOL. Actually groups like La Raza want to be known now as Latino. These ethnic groups have decided to change their name just as we went from Negroes, to blacks, to African-Americans. 53% of Latinos/Hispanics self-describe themselves as white. The Census Bureau set up the category of non-Hispanic whites to capture data. Hence we know have folks like George Zimmerman who the NYT describes as a white Hispanic. We are becoming like South Africa during apartheid. Theyad four main groups with a number of sub-groups and even honorary whites.
We have 1.2 million LEGAL IMMIGRANTS a year. Even if we were to reduce the number of illegal aliens, legal immigration would still have a major impact on this country. We don’t need that many, especially since 75% of them have a HS degree or less. 25% of the adults are high school dropouts. 50 to 61% of the illegal aliens are HS dropouts.
You are passionate on this issue ... almost to the point of hysteria, and I agree with some of your ideas ... but is anybody in either party working for your goals?
And really long posts filled with charts and stuff are interesting but ... well, okay, I lie.
They are not interesting.