RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events In U.S. Name Count, Garcias Are Catching Up With Joneses

As I said earlier, many native Americans assimilated to the technologically superior European culture. The Cherokees I am descended from are the largest surviving North American tribe. Other tribes that were more warlike did not fare as well.
There are about equal numbers of recorded killings, of both Native Americans and Europeans, in their clashes. It is liberals who perpetuate the historically innaccurate notion of mass genocide, despite that over 90% died from mere contact with Europeans, who had immunity to illnesses that Native Americans had never been exposed to. Some massacres and mistreatments of Native Americans occurred, to be sure. (The infected blankets Snarf mentioned were a single incident, not a mass-implemented genocide as he implies.)

But again, Native American hands are not clean of blood either, both before and after contact with Europeans.

Native Americans were not advancing culturally, mostly stone-age hunter-gatherers, who had not even invented the wheel. Who also engaged in bloody tribal warfare, human sacrifice, and even cannibalism. Life spans were short for native Americans in those days.
So spare me the arguments that Europeans interrupted some kind of Native American utopia. There are actually more Native Americans alive today than there were at the time of first European contact, and enjoying a much better standard of living.

As I said in a previous topic, according to an anthropologist friend of mine studying the issue, the average Native American family of four here in Florida is worth about 1.4 million dollars, thanks to tribal allotment from casino revenue.

So happy Thanksgiving to you too.





You've repeatedly voiced your hostility toward whites, way beyond what you could possibly twist the most ambiguous phrase of mine to imply.

I can accept that you don't share that opinion of all whites. But you seem to feel it toward quite a few whites. And in many anecdotes you've given over the years, you seem to live for the opportunity to rub your ethnicity in the white majority's face on every possible occassion.
I find it exciting to meet people from other cultures.

But when someone like you comes along and basically say: "Yeah, look at you white people, you're shitting in your pants because we're taking over!" Gee, why would I be offended by that?



I think the ONLY people you have a problem with are anyone who doesn't share your liberal views. And then you feel a need to shout them down, harass and slander them with all kinds of racist labels.

Even in my more moderate statements across many topics, you still twist what I say to conform to your whipping-boy stereotype of what you imagine, in your wildest wet dreams, to be the ultimate stereotype of a white racist conservative. Often in total opposition to what I actually said.



You call it fear. I call it statistical proof from the U.S. Justice Department, the I.N.S., the U.S. Census Bureau, and respected journalists such as Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, and other sources such as Worldnet Daily, and VDare. And even a few stories from the more mainstream networks.



No, the fears were legitimate, but a stress on the necessity of assimilation and resolving the social problems made things work out.

I don't know much about the Catholic plot to control America, but it is certainly true that the Catholic church dominated Europe for centuries (hence the First Amendment, about not establishing a state religion, and not prohibiting the free practice of all denominations)

You say it's the same, and that my concerns about excessive immigration are just "fear".
But as Buchanan points out well in his book, it's very different now:

(1) Up till 1965, the number of immigrants coming in annually were much smaller, in many years less than 200,000 admitted per year. Now it's over 1.2 million per year (600,000 of whom apply for visas while living illegally in the U.S. with legal-immigrant relatives). Far beyond what even liberal John F. Kennedy envisioned as a sensible level of immigration that could be assimilated.

(2) Up until 1965, virtually all immigration was from Europe. Whether immigrats were English, German, Russian, Greek, Italian, Hungarian or whatever, virtually all immigrants were of a shared Judao-Christian background, and had that much in common.

(3) Up until 1965, when a radical brand of liberalism emerged, assimilation was expected, and strongly urged. But now ethnic separatism and outright anti-Americanism, is encouraged. As is a very negative teaching of American history, that combined work to undermine national unity, and instead encourage ethnic separatism.

(4) Up until 1965, immigrants were selected with the specific purpose of who would likely assimilate well into American culture. Since 1965, we didn't just begin third-world immigration (a very different non-European group of immigrants that our nation has never before successfully assimilated), but we began importing third-world immigration in numbers (36 million) that by far eclipse the previous German, Irish and Italian immigrants combined.
A mass of third-world immigrants that are yet to be proven can successfully be assimilated.

(5) After each huge period of immigration, there was a period of very limited immigration, to allow the large waves of immigrants to assimilate. But despite the visible cracks in the system, any call for lowering immigration is, predictably, labelled as "racist" and "xenophobic", despite that it is clearly a sensible thing to do, to insure national stability.



Again, I make logical well-documented statistically-based arguments for sensible immigration policy, and you resort to slanderous allegations of "racism" and "fear", to bypass my points. "Racism" and "fear" is just how you deceitfully slander any valid opinion you object to.



Once again, you toss in all kinds of weird ideas of your own, and try to pass them off as my ideas, so you can label me a racist.

You again say "Nativist" as if I wanted a white-only America, when I have clearly not said that. I said I welcome people of all races, and enjoy interacting with people of all races and cultures, but I want an America where we, regardless of race, have a shared American culture we all assimilate to.

"Mass deportations and stripping citizenship to millions" is again your idea, not mine. Your malicious attempt to paint me as something I'm not.

I find it exciting to interact with people of other nationalities and cultures. I just don't want them imported to the point that they overwhelm our culture.
To the point that they are at more than 50% of the Broward County population, and approaching 50% in Miami.
And also approaching 50% of total population in Mexican border counties of California, New Mexico and Texas.

I like people from Cuba, Colombia and Brazil. But I don't want the United States to become another Cuba, Colombia or Brazil. But the U.S. is fast becoming that. To the point that for the first time in my life I have to almost be bilingual to do business in my own city.
Again: they are not assimilating to our culture. We are being forced to assimilate to theirs.



A large percentage of Americans have always been concerned about it. It is politicians, whose campaigns are funded by corporations who want cheap immigrant labor, who are betraying America, and betraying average Americans, by ignoring the will of the people. I think consciousness of what is happening to our nation has caused a swelling of opinion for the first time, with this recent immigration "amnesty" bill that was rejected.
It's not an "every four year paranoid issue". It's a real issue, and it's reached a tipping point that demands action.



Again you slander me by alleging it's about race. Once again: For me, it's about assimilation, who assimilates and who doesn't, not race.

More bodies in America with foreign loyalties --of most concern, Mexico-- who feel strongly that the U.S. "stole" the Southwest and that Mexico should have it back (and the innate anti-America/anti-white hostility that attitude reflects), a high ratio of Mexicans who enter this country illegally and don't respect our nation and our laws. That 1 in 12 illegal immigrants caught is found to have a criminal record, that 150,000 crimes are committed annually in this country by illegals, 24% of our prison populations, crowding our courts, high school dropouts who end up on welfare if not in jail... all these things make me seriously question whether these are "Americans" or just alien bodies in America.

Many do assimilate and contribute, as I said.

But as I also said, Mexico has the highest numbers in all these negative categories, that indicate, relative to other groups, they don't assimilate as well, and should be given visas more selectively.

With more visas given to those of third-world nations (S. Korea, India, the Phillipines, etc.) that over the last 40 years statistically assimilate better, and don't end up on welfare or in prison.



Half the local Florida stations on the dial --50 percent!-- is a heartbeat away from spanish dominance, and it is hardly "paranoid" to object to this. As I said, with such a widespread Spanish-speaking accomodation in entertainment and business, why should they bother learning English, or assimilating?

When half the radio and TV stations broadcast in Spanish, when they can press 2 on the phone with their bank or credit card and do business in Spanish, it sends a strong message that they don't need to learn English. When the media is half Spanish radio and TV channels, it is well on its way to becoming 60%, 75% or 100% Spanish. It is invasion. And to not resist it is absolutely a mistake.



Half the channels on the dial. Again, it's multiculturalism gone insane. It's a formula for balkanization and separatism.



No. My point is and remains assimilation, not race. In deceitful communist rhetorical technique, straight from the Moscow Central Committee, you're trying to factlessly slander me through sheer repitition. That you rely on slander over facts just proves to me that you're wrong, to the point of being evil.
That is just pure malicious deceit on your part.

There's no contradiction in what I said, despite your sleaziest attempt, not through facts, but through pure innuendo, to imply otherwise.

As I said, Mexican immigrants have the worst statistical numbers for gangs, drug-related arrests, imprisonment, high-school dropout rates, etc. But I said what I did to make clear that I don't think all Mexicans are criminals. There are many who assimilate and pursue higher education, and contribute as true Americans. But in full disclosure, there are many who do not, a higher percentage of non-performers than any nationality that immigrates here.
And for that reason, and for that reason alone (not race!) I don't think we should continue to accept more immigrants from Mexico than any other nation (30 percent of the U.S.'s legal immigration).
There are other hispanic nations that don't have the poor numbers that Mexico does, and we should draw more immigrants from them.






As I said, I'm less familiar with the anti-Catholic fears. But there was a time when Europe was completely controlled by the Catholic church, and many of our nation's founders came here for religious freedom, from the repressive control of the Catholic church.

It's not paranoid or inconceivable that the Catholic church had plans to similarly spread their influence in the U.S.
Or paranoid, given the Catholic church's history (the Inquisition, the Jesuits), to want to insure that was prevented.



Because of a stress on the need to assimilate, that thanks to "multiculturalism" is now considered racist. What insured assimmilation then no longer protects us. Imagine 50% of radio and TV stations in german during the time you mention. We'd be a german colony now.



Because of a hold period where there was virtually no immigration for several decades, to absorb the large wave of immigrants, yes, they were assimilated.

With 36 million immigrants in the last 40 years, where is the logical freeze on immigration, to insure assimilation? We just continue to let in another 1.2 million every year. Plus the estimated 20 million illegals here now. It is, again, not immigration, but invasion. With no end in sight.



Again, large waves, punctuated with decades of low immigration, to absorb and assimilate the large waves. But the assimilation mechanisms are now broken, because of liberal notions of "multiculturalism" and "racism".

The mechanisms that insured assimilation have been broken by liberals, who branded them "racist."




So if I limited my social interaction to just Europeans, I would be a racist (naturally, by definition).

But even though I interact and socialize with people of pretty much every race and nationality, you still somehow manage to brand that as racism, through some liberal distortion, as well.

Nice loaded argument. But it bypasses the reality of my daily experience.




So now you find a way to brand even my Argentinian friends as goose-stepping Aryan supermen.

Again, you assume a lot, and your argument is pure slander. Orlando is the friend I mentioned in another topic where I said we were in a restaurant, and seeing a mistake in the bill, he said: "That waitress hears me talk with a Spanish accent, and she thinks I add with a hispanic accent too." Which shocked me, as have other comments where he felt discriminated against because he's hispanic.