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.
You do realize that California was nothing but a territory of Mexico and those that populated what is now southern California were of Spanish decent, right. It took California 2 years after Mexico's independence (1821) to actually accept becoming a territory of Mexico (1823). What about the Russians and English that also claimed parts of California during that time? California was never invaded, in fact it held its own revolt against Mexico (1846), the Bear Flag Revolt.
Because they wanted Indpendence from Mexico does not mean they wanted to be bought by the US. Assume much?
Wrong! We are quite aware of that but the fact is that much of this Hispanic growth is due to illegal immigration and anchor babies and that is the objection!
Wow, haven't seen anyone miss a point by so far in a long time.
1. So its not ok for whites to take land, but its ok for other people, of other skin colors to do the same?
As for California, let it rot, the liberal utopia will fall apart like a large Detroit.
First of all, I did not say that I approved of this. I said that I didn't care about it at all, other than from the perspective of doing demographic research. I simply said that some people would consider this to be karma for the U.S. forcibly taking that land from Mexico in the late 1840s.
Also, it is obviously not okay for any country (regardless of race) to take land without the other party's consent, especially nowadays.
1. Karma? Texas kicked Mexico out 1836. Guatemala kicked Mexico out about 1830 but I DON'T hear Mexico wanting Guatemala back.
If we're gonna go there: how about the "karma" of Mexico kicking Spain out about 1810. If Mexico LOST that war; IMHO Spain would've SOLD all of what was New Spain to the US by about 1850. France and Russia sold a LOT of land to the US around then.
Those were wars of independence, not other countries taking that land from you.
As for Spain selling New Spain to the U.S., maybe, but then again, Spain was reluctant about selling Florida to the U.S. (I think for a while) and it also consistently refused to sell Cuba to the U.S.
That's just utter nonsense. Hispanics don't view the GOP as treating them equally simply because the GOP won't cow tow to their ethnocentric demands of giving their ethnic group here illegally a pass on our immigration laws. It is they that are being unreasonable not the GOP. WTH makes them so special that they think they should be above our immigration laws and rewarded for breaking them?
You mean like Ronald R did? Seems even that did not buy the Hispanic vote
1. Hey DesertDetroiter, futurists is giving you your "romanticized history".
2. Futurists, are you aware that California was only a territory of Mexico, and that it voted to do that in 1823, otherwise California would have been its own Republic when Mexico gained its independence in 1821.
3. California was never invaded by the US, it had its own Bear Flag Revolt against Mexico.
4. California was never part of Mexico in the since of being Mexico.
1. I'm Futurist, not Futurists. Anyway, I am simply stating what some people might think in regards to this. I did not say that I think like this myself.
2. No--thank you for the info.
3. Yes, pro-U.S. settlers staged this revolt. Did they and/or the U.S. stage a referendum afterwards to determine who California should belong to?
Because they wanted Indpendence from Mexico does not mean they wanted to be bought by the US. Assume much?
Do you know anything about that portion of history? Quick history lesson: Revolt was initially proclaimed in Sonoma on June 14, 1846, before news of the outbreak of the Mexican–American War had reached the area. Although participants declared independence from Mexico, they failed to form a functional provisional government. Thus, the "republic" never exercised any real authority, and it was never recognized by any nation. In fact, most of Alta California knew nothing about it. The revolt lasted 26 days, at the end of which the U.S. Army arrived to occupy the area. Once the leaders of the revolt knew the United States was claiming the area, they disbanded their "republic" and supported the U.S. federal effort to annex Alta California.
Now, what was assumed much? If you don't understand the time frame, don't make things up.
3. Yes, pro-U.S. settlers staged this revolt. Did they and/or the U.S. stage a referendum afterwards to determine who California should belong to?
4. What about between the 1820s and the 1840s?
California had an uprising of both settlers and vaqueros that took Sonoma prior to their knowing of the declaration of war on Mexico from the US. Mexico only sent 55 soldiers to attempt to squash the rebellion. California attempted to obtain its freedom from Mexico, the same as Texas did. California wanted to become it own Republic. 26 days after the rebellion California ceded itself to the US.
California: 1823 - 1846 Mexican Territory, portions of what is now Northern California also claimed by the Russians and the English dating as far back as 1812 for the Russians, and further for the English. Lets not forget the French who also explored here and laid claim.
What more do you want to know? Its not that hard to pick up a book and read about all this, the trick is reciting it accurately vs inserting ones own bias.
Last edited by Iron Wood; 09-15-2013 at 11:18 PM..
just more reason to end birth right citizenship, and build the border fence..
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.