Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, I'm reading some of the things that the OP quotes and they are basically people's opinions, doesn't necessarily mean they are paranoid about some "ethnic conspiracy." Truth is the truth.
Is this a claim on your part that the sentiments expressed by Stormfront white supremacists are "the truth" rather than espousal of an ethnic conspiracy theory?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
Attempting to paint forum members as mere racists is disgusting and inappropriate...Insisting that they are merely nothing more than vile racists does nothing but poison the well and shut down the discussion about real racism.
No one in this thread has claimed that forum members are "racists," be they mere or vile. Rather, claims regarding ethnic conspiracy theories are interpreted as representative of a component of mainstream dialogue regarding current immigration levels, which I argue is reflective of an attitude that considers Mexican/Hispanic immigrants to have dual loyalties or greater loyalties to Mexico (though why non-Mexican Hispanics would have loyalties to Mexico is never explained, and is simply an effect of artificial outgroup homogenization by some Anglo whites who believe these theories), a belief that could have potentially adverse consequences in terms of increased ethnic profiling in response to a moderate crisis, similar to the current climate of Arab/Middle Eastern profiling, and mass roundups and detainments in response to a severe crisis, similar to WWII-era Japanese internment. This conclusion is supported by peer-reviewed social psychological research.
The first supported claim is that Anglo whites regarding Hispanics (and Hispanic non-whites specifically, judging from the rhetoric), as a demographic threat to their majority and desire greater immigration restrictions as a result, evidence of which is found in A Distorted Nation: Perceptions of Racial/Ethnic Group Sizes and Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Other Minorities (http://www.kx72.net/Site/bashback/social%20forces.pdf - broken link): "The larger that non-Hispanic whites perceive minority groups to have grown in numbers relative to themselves, the more they desire to see immigration restrictions imposed. (See LETIN in Table 6.) Moreover the perception of threat implicit in distorted perceptions of group sizes corresponds to a hierarchy in the majority group's preferences for immigrants. The effect of logged ratio on the desire for immigration restriction is greatest for Latin American immigrants (LETINHISP) and least for those from Europe (LETINEUR), with immigrants from Asia in between (LETINASN)...As other research has also found, the misperceptions about group sizes are related to the everyday social environments in which respondents live: the more they encounter members of racial and ethnic minorities in their communities the larger they perceive these groups to be on the national plane. This finding does not imply, however, that the attitudinal effects of group-size perceptions are attributable to community contexts. Our analyses show that, even with the compositions of these contexts controlled, misperceptions have significant influences on attitudes for members of the majority group."
Objective. This study assesses the association between Anglo aversion to Latinos, physical proximity to Latinos, and contact with ethnic minorities, with expressed preferences for immigration policies.
Methods. Data were drawn from a telephone survey of San Diego County, California, residents (N=549 Anglos) using random-digit-dial procedures during 2005–2006 that was conducted by closely supervised professional interviewers. Descriptive reports, tau-b correlations, and multivariate logistic regressions were used for analysis.
Results. Aversion to Latinos, as indicated by an adaptation of the Bogardus social distance scale, was related to more restrictionist attitudes about legal and Mexican immigration. Associations increased when respondents were primed to consider Mexican immigration, although aversion to Latinos was not related to attitudes about amnesty for undocumented persons. Contrary to some previous findings, proximity to Latino populations increased opposition to legal immigration and amnesty. Reported minority contact had minimal impact but increased support for amnesty.
Conclusions. Attitudes about immigration may be motivated more by racial resentments than other considerations. Future research should identify racial factors that influence Anglo policy positions beyond the classic Anglo/African division that has dominated this research arena.
While it is an application of inaccurate nomenclature to refer to "Latinos" as a race, it is a reasonable expectation that mixed ("mestizos") and full blooded Indian Hispanics are most associated with the so-called "Hispanic phenotype," and empirical research supports the conclusion that they rank beneath white Hispanics in various well-being and socioeconomic status measurements in their countries of origin as well as in certain regions of the United States.
The next study of relevance is Ingroup Bias, Classic Ethnocentrism, and Non-Ethnocentrism Among American Whites, which is a, "General Social Survey (GSS) national probability sample of 1,119 non-Jewish whites who rated Jews, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics on five traits." The results were that, "The respondents gave themselves and Jews the highest ratings, and blacks and Hispanics the lowest evaluations, with Asians in the middle."
Specifically for our purposes, non-Hispanic and non-Jewish whites rank Hispanics as the least patriotic ethnic group, below themselves, Jews, Asians, and blacks.
Now that we have established that Anglo whites often perceive Hispanics (and likely Hispanic non-whites) as a demographic threat to their majority and dominance and desire their immigration restriction as a result, as well as less patriotic than other ethnic groups on average, we can determine the effects of crisis associated with an ethnic group through consultation of Effects of terrorism on attitudes and ideological orientation: "A quasi-experimental study on the effects of terrorism on racial prejudice and ideological orientation is presented. Two independent samples were contacted before and after the Islamic terrorist attacks against railways in Madrid (11 March 2004). Anti-Arab and anti-Semite prejudices, authoritarianism and ideological orientations (liberal against conservative) were evaluated. Results showed that those terrorist attacks provoked changes in a reactionary and conservative direction: stronger prejudices not only against the target group (Arabs), but against another uninvolved group (Jewish); an increase in authoritarianism; stronger attachment to traditional conservative values, and a reduction in the attachment to liberal values."
That there is a scalar relationship between moderate and severe crisis and commensurate moderate and severe response in terms of negative ethnic discrimination is supported by a mainstream pundit's linkage of the two in advocacy of such negative ethnic discrimination, namely Michelle Malkin's In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror, which features this product description: "The author of Invasion argues that the internment of ethnic Japanese during World War II was the result of real national security concerns, just as the Bush administration's moves to interrogate, track, and deport suspected terrorists is moderate and restrained."
That there is a precedent for U.S. citizens perceived as associated with a hostile foreign ethnic group that functions as a treasonous or seditious fifth column is indicated by this wartime Los Angeles Times editorial: "A viper is nonetheless a viper wherever the egg is hatched...So, a Japanese American born of Japanese parents, nurtured upon Japanese traditions, living in a transplanted Japanese atmosphere...notwithstanding his nominal brand of accidental citizenship almost inevitably and with the rarest exceptions grows up to be a Japanese, and not an American...Thus, while it might cause injustice to a few to treat them all as potential enemies, I cannot escape the conclusion... that such treatment...should be accorded to each and all of them while we are at war with their race."
An extrapolation from this supports the argument that I have made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
Most people who are against illegal immigration are against it because it is contrary to their economic interests.
Is there peer-reviewed empirical research that supports this claim? Illegal immigration is caused by cross-country wage differentials exacerbated by neoliberalism and the failure to pursue equitable globalization strategy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
If hispanics come up when discussing illegal immigration it is for one fact and one fact only: because 80% are ALL illegals are Latino.
At issue is not the fact that Hispanics and/or Latinos "come up when discussing illegal immigration," but the fact that some opponents of perceived excessive immigration espouse a detailed ethnic conspiracy theory regarding Hispanics/Latinos achieving a "reconquista" of the U.S. Southwest through demographic shifts, because it is the historical Aztec homeland of "Aztlan," and that a number of individuals that espouse this theory are white supremacists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
You can't have it both ways as many seem to want to do on this issue. You can't advocate for your ethnic group and then ask others outside of your ethnic group to support you.
That's exactly what's going on with many supporters of illegal immigration. They are advocating policies that help their communities in the name of identity politics. When those policies directly hurt other members of the community who do not share their ethnicity all they have to say is scream racism.
That's not a convincing argument.
These sentiments, the idea that this is primarily based on self-interested ethnic advocacy. Members of ingroups often conceive of outgroups as monolithic entities with uniform patterns of thought and ideology, so Anglo whites often freely speak of "Hispanics supporting illegal immigration" as though such a broad and sweeping generalization could be reasonably made.
Moreover, the claim that Hispanics believe that opponents of current immigration levels are motived by "anti-Hispanic racism" is a claim that I would suggest is caused by lack of education about the characteristics of Hispanics, since they are not a racial group, but rather a multi-racial ethnic group, and the concept of "racism against Hispanics" is not coherent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
He's linking to a racist board
This is false; I explicitly noted that I did not link to the board.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
and implying there's no difference between them and those of us who post here. Of course he's accusing us of racism. It's a profoundly offensive way to unfairly tar those you disagree with and attempt to shut down discussion.
This is also false. I have made no claim that "there's no difference" between Stormfront members and advocates of ethnic conspiracy theories on this board. On the contrary, a major difference is that the former group are explicit advocates of genetic determinism, while the latter group are not. Rather, I have claimed that they promote the same ethnic conspiracy theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
And........... you could do the exact same thing off of any website like the San Diego Union Tribune or even the San Francisco newspaper's web that posted ANY article about illegal immigration.
Espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is certainly not limited to this forum or Stormfront. Rather, I have interpreted opposition to current immigration levels on this forum as indicative of mainstream opinion, and the corresponding opposition and espousal of the same theories on Stormfront as a potential (though unlikely) consequence of adherence to these beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar
#12 - Benicar
So, this is what you consider a racist comment? Also, it’s interesting that you failed to indicate the thread, so my comments could be read in their proper context. But, I suppose painting me as a racist was your sole objective. Yet, I never mentioned race, ethnicity, or national origin, only illegal aliens. Pathetic!
This comment was extracted from a thread that centered around discussion of a letter to the editor that contained this content: "I have found that substitute teaching in these areas most of the Hispanic students do not want to be educated but rather be gang members and gangsters. They hate America and are determined to reclaim this area for Mexico...When the citizens of a country are forced to speak the invaders language, adopt their customs, and forced to support them, are we not a conquer nation? I do not want to see our state and nation turned into a third world country. Thank you for standing up to this invasion."
This is an espousal of the ethnic conspiracy theory being discussed, so your supportive comment is of relevance.
Is this a claim on your part that the sentiments expressed by Stormfront white supremacists are "the truth" rather than espousal of an ethnic conspiracy theory?
No one in this thread has claimed that forum members are "racists," be they mere or vile. Rather, claims regarding ethnic conspiracy theories are interpreted as representative of a component of mainstream dialogue regarding current immigration levels, which I argue is reflective of an attitude that considers Mexican/Hispanic immigrants to have dual loyalties or greater loyalties to Mexico (though why non-Mexican Hispanics would have loyalties to Mexico is never explained, and is simply an effect of artificial outgroup homogenization by some Anglo whites who believe these theories), a belief that could have potentially adverse consequences in terms of increased ethnic profiling in response to a moderate crisis, similar to the current climate of Arab/Middle Eastern profiling, and mass roundups and detainments in response to a severe crisis, similar to WWII-era Japanese internment. This conclusion is supported by peer-reviewed social psychological research.
The first supported claim is that Anglo whites regarding Hispanics (and Hispanic non-whites specifically, judging from the rhetoric), as a demographic threat to their majority and desire greater immigration restrictions as a result, evidence of which is found in A Distorted Nation: Perceptions of Racial/Ethnic Group Sizes and Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Other Minorities (http://www.kx72.net/Site/bashback/social%20forces.pdf - broken link): "The larger that non-Hispanic whites perceive minority groups to have grown in numbers relative to themselves, the more they desire to see immigration restrictions imposed. (See LETIN in Table 6.) Moreover the perception of threat implicit in distorted perceptions of group sizes corresponds to a hierarchy in the majority group's preferences for immigrants. The effect of logged ratio on the desire for immigration restriction is greatest for Latin American immigrants (LETINHISP) and least for those from Europe (LETINEUR), with immigrants from Asia in between (LETINASN)...As other research has also found, the misperceptions about group sizes are related to the everyday social environments in which respondents live: the more they encounter members of racial and ethnic minorities in their communities the larger they perceive these groups to be on the national plane. This finding does not imply, however, that the attitudinal effects of group-size perceptions are attributable to community contexts. Our analyses show that, even with the compositions of these contexts controlled, misperceptions have significant influences on attitudes for members of the majority group."
While it is an application of inaccurate nomenclature to refer to "Latinos" as a race, it is a reasonable expectation that mixed ("mestizos") and full blooded Indian Hispanics are most associated with the so-called "Hispanic phenotype," and empirical research supports the conclusion that they rank beneath white Hispanics in various well-being and socioeconomic status measurements in their countries of origin as well as in certain regions of the United States.
The next study of relevance is Ingroup Bias, Classic Ethnocentrism, and Non-Ethnocentrism Among American Whites, which is a, "General Social Survey (GSS) national probability sample of 1,119 non-Jewish whites who rated Jews, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics on five traits." The results were that, "The respondents gave themselves and Jews the highest ratings, and blacks and Hispanics the lowest evaluations, with Asians in the middle."
Specifically for our purposes, non-Hispanic and non-Jewish whites rank Hispanics as the least patriotic ethnic group, below themselves, Jews, Asians, and blacks.
Now that we have established that Anglo whites often perceive Hispanics (and likely Hispanic non-whites) as a demographic threat to their majority and dominance and desire their immigration restriction as a result, as well as less patriotic than other ethnic groups on average, we can determine the effects of crisis associated with an ethnic group through consultation of Effects of terrorism on attitudes and ideological orientation: "A quasi-experimental study on the effects of terrorism on racial prejudice and ideological orientation is presented. Two independent samples were contacted before and after the Islamic terrorist attacks against railways in Madrid (11 March 2004). Anti-Arab and anti-Semite prejudices, authoritarianism and ideological orientations (liberal against conservative) were evaluated. Results showed that those terrorist attacks provoked changes in a reactionary and conservative direction: stronger prejudices not only against the target group (Arabs), but against another uninvolved group (Jewish); an increase in authoritarianism; stronger attachment to traditional conservative values, and a reduction in the attachment to liberal values."
That there is a scalar relationship between moderate and severe crisis and commensurate moderate and severe response in terms of negative ethnic discrimination is supported by a mainstream pundit's linkage of the two in advocacy of such negative ethnic discrimination, namely Michelle Malkin's In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror, which features this product description: "The author of Invasion argues that the internment of ethnic Japanese during World War II was the result of real national security concerns, just as the Bush administration's moves to interrogate, track, and deport suspected terrorists is moderate and restrained."
That there is a precedent for U.S. citizens perceived as associated with a hostile foreign ethnic group that functions as a treasonous or seditious fifth column is indicated by this wartime Los Angeles Times editorial: "A viper is nonetheless a viper wherever the egg is hatched...So, a Japanese American born of Japanese parents, nurtured upon Japanese traditions, living in a transplanted Japanese atmosphere...notwithstanding his nominal brand of accidental citizenship almost inevitably and with the rarest exceptions grows up to be a Japanese, and not an American...Thus, while it might cause injustice to a few to treat them all as potential enemies, I cannot escape the conclusion... that such treatment...should be accorded to each and all of them while we are at war with their race."
An extrapolation from this supports the argument that I have made.
Is there peer-reviewed empirical research that supports this claim? Illegal immigration is caused by cross-country wage differentials exacerbated by neoliberalism and the failure to pursue equitable globalization strategy.
At issue is not the fact that Hispanics and/or Latinos "come up when discussing illegal immigration," but the fact that some opponents of perceived excessive immigration espouse a detailed ethnic conspiracy theory regarding Hispanics/Latinos achieving a "reconquista" of the U.S. Southwest through demographic shifts, because it is the historical Aztec homeland of "Aztlan," and that a number of individuals that espouse this theory are white supremacists.
These sentiments, the idea that this is primarily based on self-interested ethnic advocacy. Members of ingroups often conceive of outgroups as monolithic entities with uniform patterns of thought and ideology, so Anglo whites often freely speak of "Hispanics supporting illegal immigration" as though such a broad and sweeping generalization could be reasonably made.
Moreover, the claim that Hispanics believe that opponents of current immigration levels are motived by "anti-Hispanic racism" is a claim that I would suggest is caused by lack of education about the characteristics of Hispanics, since they are not a racial group, but rather a multi-racial ethnic group, and the concept of "racism against Hispanics" is not coherent.
This is false; I explicitly noted that I did not link to the board.
This is also false. I have made no claim that "there's no difference" between Stormfront members and advocates of ethnic conspiracy theories on this board. On the contrary, a major difference is that the former group are explicit advocates of genetic determinism, while the latter group are not. Rather, I have claimed that they promote the same ethnic conspiracy theory.
Espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is certainly not limited to this forum or Stormfront. Rather, I have interpreted opposition to current immigration levels on this forum as indicative of mainstream opinion, and the corresponding opposition and espousal of the same theories on Stormfront as a potential (though unlikely) consequence of adherence to these beliefs.
This comment was extracted from a thread that centered around discussion of a letter to the editor that contained this content: "I have found that substitute teaching in these areas most of the Hispanic students do not want to be educated but rather be gang members and gangsters. They hate America and are determined to reclaim this area for Mexico...When the citizens of a country are forced to speak the invaders language, adopt their customs, and forced to support them, are we not a conquer nation? I do not want to see our state and nation turned into a third world country. Thank you for standing up to this invasion."
This is an espousal of the ethnic conspiracy theory being discussed, so your supportive comment is of relevance.
Again, your interspersion of Stormfront comments with those of C-D, was intended to malign the posters on this forum as being “the same as” the admitted racists on Stormfront. Nothing more. Nothing less. I am sure there are Stormfronters who also fervently oppose pedophilia. Does that equate to all anti-pedophiles as being of the same racist mindset as the members of Stormfront? Of course not! Your veiled accusations lack merit as well as logic. Good day.
Again, your interspersion of Stormfront comments with those of C-D, was intended to malign the posters on this forum as being “the same as” the admitted racists on Stormfront. Nothing more. Nothing less. I am sure there are Stormfronters who also fervently oppose pedophilia. Does that equate to all anti-pedophiles as being of the same racist mindset as the members of Stormfront? Of course not! Your veiled accusations lack merit as well as logic. Good day.
Such a view is not of relevance to race or ethnicity, as mutual espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is. Moreover, I explicitly stated that the quoted members were not "the same as" these white supremacists, as well as the important distinction of genetic determinism.
Is this a claim on your part that the sentiments expressed by Stormfront white supremacists are "the truth" rather than espousal of an ethnic conspiracy theory?
Yes. Even as a Black person, if someone at Stormfront (who cares about that website anyway? They really are a bunch of narcissitic and over-thinking people anyway) posts a sentence that is fact then who am I to pretend that it is NOT truth? It could be a statistic that is simply true and released by a credible agency or source and used as the basis of someone's argument. Am I going to deny that truth? No. That is why I say "the truth is the truth." I may not like the truth or I may be uncomfortable by it, but I am completely against political correctness and denying truth just to make people feel better or to avoid talking about something that is uncomfortable to address. So, some of the things that I read in the original post follow under those guidelines: they are just the truth. We can't deny truths just because we want to try to categorize it as racist. That's why this whole illegal immigration topic and issue in the United States isn't moving forward with decent progress because we keep calling out racism and ignoring what people are saying because we want to just disregard it as racism or prejudice.
Some of you don't understand what it feels like to want to make things better but only being told you are a racist or prejudice because you present your idea or facts. People even want to cry about choice of words that people use when talking about illegal immigration. If someone says that they are "breeding," someone is going to complain because they wil say that it sounds like they are animals. Well, that's what humans do don't we? We breed. That's just an example. If someone talks about welfare and illegal immigrants then it must be an attack on Mexicans. Being Black, I know the way I feel when I read a credible study, report or statistic, I am amazed. That's the thing about being Black and being in the illegal immigration debate, I know all the feelings because I have felt that way before. I know what is going on on both sides because I've been on both.
So, some of the things that I read in the original post follow under those guidelines: they are just the truth. We can't deny truths just because we want to try to categorize it as racist. That's why this whole illegal immigration topic and issue in the United States isn't moving forward with decent progress because we keep calling out racism and ignoring what people are saying because we want to just disregard it as racism or prejudice.
Espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is not the truth, and the "Aztlan/reconquista" ethnic conspiracy theory specifically is factually inaccurate. Nonetheless, it constitutes a component of mainstream dialogue on immigration and demographics, and is indicative of hostility towards "ethnic Hispanics" that could potentially become more damaging in the event of crisis, as I argued.
Espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is not the truth, and the "Aztlan/reconquista" ethnic conspiracy theory specifically is factually inaccurate. Nonetheless, it constitutes a component of mainstream dialogue on immigration and demographics, and is indicative of hostility towards "ethnic Hispanics" that could potentially become more damaging in the event of crisis, as I argued.
Aztlan is the mythical homeland of our Native American forefathers. It is considered the extension of land that ranges from Alaska along the pacific coast of U.S. through Colorado, Texas and into the valley of Mexico. The native American people of this land once shared language and numerous cultural beliefs. Many of the same values that have existed through the ages are respected and shared as the heritage of our Native American forefathers. Aztlan remains the symbol and icon of cultural identity for the native people of the US Southwest and Mexico.
About Us (http://www.aztlandance.com/Enchilada/About_Us.html - broken link)
Quote:
"Aztlan is a state of mind for some people. It's a point in history. For some, it's a political place, for some it's a separate nation," said Armando Navarro, a professor at the University of California, Riverside, whose views have generated controversy. "It represents land lost. You are sitting in a city, Riverside, that used to be in Mexico. That gives us a sense of entitlement. This was our land."
Quote:
Its name over the decades has been tacked onto Hispanic organizations such as MEChA (Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan) which has more than 300 chapters on college campuses nationwide. The group has been attacked by those who claim its 1969 "El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan" is a separatist call for reconquest.
"Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans," according to the plan. "We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent."
Espousal of ethnic conspiracy theories is not the truth, and the "Aztlan/reconquista" ethnic conspiracy theory specifically is factually inaccurate. Nonetheless, it constitutes a component of mainstream dialogue on immigration and demographics, and is indicative of hostility towards "ethnic Hispanics" that could potentially become more damaging in the event of crisis, as I argued.
LOL ... OK, whatever you say. It's obvious that there is no point continuing to talk with you about this.
Benicar, nice post. People try to act like those things aren't a serious concern and component of the illegal immigrant debate and existence.
Again, your interspersion of Stormfront comments with those of C-D, was intended to malign the posters on this forum as being “the same as” the admitted racists on Stormfront. Nothing more. Nothing less. I am sure there are Stormfronters who also fervently oppose pedophilia. Does that equate to all anti-pedophiles as being of the same racist mindset as the members of Stormfront? Of course not! Your veiled accusations lack merit as well as logic. Good day.
Before the admission that just about every article from any source on II brings out negative comments I was going to post some links. CD is no different than any other data source and it appears to run about even with how most people feel about II.
If anything holds any merit about this thread is that people's opinions can be swayed from the ACTIONS of Illegal Immigrants as a whole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum
For the articles themselves, or the accompanying comments?...
The comments. It attracts more comments than even gay marriage and I'd say 90% are negative. They get so many the admins have to dump them and start over, usually at around 600 comments in a short amount of time. I'm sure data storage and bandwidth performance suffer with that kind of volume.
Last edited by 1AngryTaxPayer; 07-13-2011 at 01:37 PM..
Again, your interspersion of Stormfront comments with those of C-D, was intended to malign the posters on this forum as being “the same as” the admitted racists on Stormfront. Nothing more. Nothing less. I am sure there are Stormfronters who also fervently oppose pedophilia. Does that equate to all anti-pedophiles as being of the same racist mindset as the members of Stormfront? Of course not! Your veiled accusations lack merit as well as logic. Good day.
Exactly. We're not stupid.
And yes, Senator "Roberto" Menendez does seem himself as a Latino who reprents Latinos:
my party continue to seize the issues important to Latino voters, issues the party has consistently led on - universal health care, real educational opportunities, economic empowerment, stronger families, comprehensive immigration reform and changing our course in Iraq - then we will see record numbers of Latinos come out to vote
By comprehensive immigration reform "Roberto" means amnesty for a largely unskilled, poorly educated, non-tax paying population. He supports this solely because most people who would benefit from that idiotic policy share his ethnicity. As an elected public official he apparently views his first priority not to the needs of people in NJ but to people in Central and South America.
In other words he's the Latino Senator not the senator from NJ. I'm not voting for him because of it. He was elected to represent NJ citizens not people from Latin America. To label my decision to vote against him because of that assertion mere racism is disgusting.
That's basically the only argument that most illegal supporters have on this issue: disagree with amnesty for illegal immigrants and you are a racist. It's a vile insult that does nothing but cover up real racism.
By comprehensive immigration reform "Roberto" means amnesty for a largely unskilled, poorly educated, non-tax paying population. He supports this solely because most people who would benefit from that idiotic policy share his ethnicity. As an elected public official he apparently views his first priority not to the needs of people in NJ but to people in Central and South America.
In other words he's the Latino Senator not the senator from NJ. I'm not voting for him because of it. He was elected to represent NJ citizens not people from Latin America. To label my decision to vote against him because of that assertion mere racism is disgusting.
That's basically the only argument that most illegal supporters have on this issue: disagree with amnesty for illegal immigrants and you are a racist. It's a vile insult that does nothing but cover up real racism.
Excellent post, Eleanora. Pro-illegals call the facts about ethnic solidarity as being racist when it speaks for itself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
