Pajamas Media

111 Comments

1. Ed Wallis:

Another racist screed from this author.

“And now, it is because 31 Republican senators recently voted against the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor even after many admitted that she was qualified for the very position they were intent on denying her, leaving the impression that the Republicans were pandering to white constituents put on edge by Sotomayor’s speeches on “The World According to ‘A Wise Latina.’””

HEY, Ruben, maybe…just maybe, these Republicans understood that a person may be “qualified” but may hold positions fundamentally in conflict with the U.S. Constitution.

But noooooooooooooo, not to this “author.”

PJM, cut this albatross from your lineup.

Aug 24, 2009 - 1:33 am 2. Steve Sampson:

The “Wise Latina” deserved the objective scrutiny she received. Racists and bigots need to be called out for their opinions and she made hers known over the years, especially by her allegiance with “La Raza.” If Hispanics who have the entrprneurial spirit want to cast their fare with the Progressive Socialists that control the two main countries they left, Mexico and Cuba, to march in Lock step with the Progressive Socialists of this country, they should have stayed home.

The Hispanics who understand business and how the principles of Freedom work should be able to understand the differences in the two different systems. If they are looking for the free ride and to become freeloading wards of the state, the Progressive Socialist platform will be much more appealing. Unfortunately, they will be attaching their hopes to a party that is ready to implode and will not be likely to recover from the effects of the Village Idiot in the White House for decades.

If that is how they choose to participate in the American Dream by identifying themselves as losers and victims; then they deserve their role in America.

Our new SCJ is more than ready to classify Hispanics as wards of the state and place them in a perpetual welfare state of victim-hood. If that is their goal, that is where they belong. If they want to participate and rely on their own capabilities rather than being told they can never compete or achieve, they will do well, it is not the role of Conservatives to pander to minorities and wipe their butts. The opportunities are here, if you are incapable, lazy, or incompetent the Democrats have a home for you. It is called Progressive Socialism, Marxism, Liberalism or Communism; the end result is the same, a welfare state for perpetuity.

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:01 am 3. Rashputin:

“In politics, you have to pick your battles. And this is one battle that Republicans shouldn’t have picked. Not to mention one that — demographics being what they are — they can’t win.”

Don’t fight the takeover GM; you can’t win so go along to get along.

Don’t fight about thirty some Czars; you can’t win so go along to get along.

Don’t fight Deathcare; you can’t win so go along to get along.

If you don’t stand up against putting unqualified people on the Supreme Court, just what is worth standing up over? What about abortion, “it’s only 4000 or so a day and demographics show most aren’t from republican families anyway”, so go along to get along, right?

Come on, anything you take a stand on is going to piss off one group or another and appeals to demographics assume that everyone in a particular group thinks alike. I, personally, think appeals to demographics are both racist and sexist, not to mention less predictive than most people think they are. Remember, back in 1975 the demographics showed that by 2000 the country would be nearly 20% Afro-American. Instead, abortion trimmed that growth rate to the extent that the nation is only 13% Afro-American and that’s a decade after the turn of the century.

The old saw of “pick your battles, this isn’t one of them” is just another excuse to leave you spine in the desk drawer. You might want to look around; the days of going along to get along are over. People are done with drawing a carefully selected line in the sand and waiting until it’s crossed. It’s time give all the sand back to the people and to hell with anyone who doesn’t like them owning it.

Have a, like, totally inoffensive sort of day

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:09 am 4. Wacky Hermit:

Mr. Navarrette, the “Wise Latina” moniker that seems to be sticking to Justice Sotomayor was her own choice of words. It has stuck not because people wish to point out her race, but because people wish to point out that she describes herself in terms of her race. Can you conceive of a white justice describing himself as a “wise white man”?

They say you should always use the sweetest and softest words possible, because you never know when you might have to eat them. Justice Sotomayor is definitely having to eat her own words with that “wise Latina” remark. For the record, I think it was more vanity than racism, since she was obviously referring to herself and not to some random person. She could have said “a wise woman” or “a wise person from a poor background,” but she chose “wise Latina.” It reveals that she identifies herself in large part along racial lines, and some people have a problem with that.

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:28 am 5. Interested:

Don’t forget 43’s motions towards Gonzalez who was a non starter before he was nominated. And 43’s stance towards Guest Worker Program.

If anything, 43 did more to forward Hispanic interests than the previous 42 Administrations.

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:42 am 6. Choose Liberty:

I am of Danish-Finnish-Irish-English heritage however when Conservative Republican Marco Rubio speaks he makes me feel good about being an American; it isn’t about his skin color or race, it is his character. Charlie Crist, on the other hand, is a sell-out to the Statist who make me feel oppressed.

Perhaps Latinos might want to first learn the long and uncivil history of racism in the Democrat Party before they embrace the Democrat Slave Plantation; the Democrat Party has virtually destroyed Black and African families, babies and entire communities.

It was, after all, Democrats who beat, arrested and jailed Dr King, Jr in Birmingham see Dr. Kings, Jr “Letter from Birmingham”.

So Tread carefully Latinos when deciding which political direction you choose to go; if you choose Democrat you will end in the political Party which will most certainty end up Treading on you.

I encourage all Americans to choose Liberty because Tyranny sucks.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:19 am 7. Choose Liberty:

I am of Danish-Finnish-Irish-English heritage however when Conservative Republican Marco Rubio speaks he makes me feel good about being an American; it isn’t about his skin color or race, it is his character. Charlie Crist, on the other hand, is a sell-out to the Statist who make me feel oppressed.

Perhaps Latinos might want to first learn the long and uncivil history of racism in the Democrat Party before they embrace the Democrat Slave Plantation; the Democrat Party has virtually destroyed Black and African families, babies and entire communities.

It was, after all, Democrats who beat, arrested and jailed Dr King, Jr in Birmingham see Dr. Kings, Jr “Letter from Birmingham”.

So Tread carefully Latinos when deciding which political direction you choose to go; if you choose Democrat you will end up in the political Party which will most certainly end up Treading on you.

I encourage all Americans to choose Liberty because Tyranny sucks.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:21 am 8. arhooley:

Got it, Ruben.

1 – Republicans are hereby advised to drop all principled objections to any person who happens to be Latino.

2 – Latinos are hereby relieved of the obligation the rest of us have to observe the distinction between an alien and an illegal alien.

3 – Those of us who left the left because we had the moral and intellectual courage to realize that we no longer had the luxury of being single-issue voters will now have to accommodate brown-skinned racists on the right.

Look buster, I came to the GOP despite my strenuous objections to actual issues — like abortion and gay marriage — and you tell me I’m not working hard enough because I won’t coddle some thin-skinned Latinos who can’t stand a legitimate argument? What’s Spanish for “screw that”?

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:27 am 9. pH-DependentNeocon:

Ruben, I am married to a Latina, so I think I have some ground to stand on when I call you out as a racist (definition: Any attitude, action or institutional structure which systematically treats an individual or group of individuals differently because of their race). This is PRECISELY what you do when you DEMAND that Republicans vote for an outright leftist who openly admits that she feels she is entitled to legislate from the bench. Your threat is impugn our character by calling us racists if we do not fall in line.

Newsflash Ruben: WE are not the party of racial division, it is the democrats who promote this and use it as a tool for votes. If you want to call out racism every time the candidate of your same ethnicity is not lavished in praise, then perhaps you indeed need to join the Democrats…you would fit in nicely in that regard.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:38 am 10. George S.:

And now, it is because 31 Republican senators recently voted against the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor even after many admitted that she was qualified for the very position they were intent on denying her, leaving the impression that the Republicans were pandering to white constituents put on edge by Sotomayor’s speeches on “The World According to ‘A Wise Latina.’”

NAVAVERRETTE

Sotomayor was not and is not qualified to be on ANY court. Her OVERTURN RATE alone proves it. HER WORD AND DEEDS PROVE IT. SHE IS A FREAKING RACIST. and it is not the republicans who are being racist against latinos …it is Sotomayor and her supporters. (that includes you).

If the electorate (latino voters) don’t or cannot see the truth then you do get the government you deserve.

WHY do latins come to the USA if it is so bad ! WAS IT BETTER WHERE THEY CAME FROM. why bring that baggage with them is beyond me. ….most latin countries have a serious socialist bent to them.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:59 am 11. justmy2cents:

I agree with 2. Steve Sampson,
Did these people come here to bring what they left behind with them or to start a new life?

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:12 am 12. Pelaut:

Rubén: you say Sen. Tom Coburn should be fitted “for a white sheet and matching hood” because he “channeled Ricky Ricardo” joking that Sotomayor “had some ‘splaining to do.”

Everyone, including hispanics, thought Desi Arnaz was adorable and funny with that accent in the 1950’s, and it still is funny and adorable today, just as Italian, Irish and what-all accents can be used adorably and with humor, or with ugliness. You have ugly glasses on. YOU are the racist.

I am not a Republican. Never was. Never will be. Country club jerks.

I am a gringo married most of my long life to a latina of color (gasp!). And nothing is funnier than my gringo accent in Spanish. Tickles everyone, except Hispanic racists like you who hear it ugly.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:19 am 13. vivo:

Lumping ALL Latinos into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.

First, you have the generational breakdown. Your grandparents, parents and children are 3 COMPLETELY different groups of thought.

Then you have your country of origin. 23 different cultures right there. You cannot lump Mexicans with Brazilians, or Argentinians or Guatemalans or Cubans.

Then you have their religions. They go from atheists to Catholics, Baptists, Jehova Witnesses, Jewish, and a thousand other sects.

Then you have right wingers, left wingers and moderates.

Put it all together, dice, spice and you get a fiambre.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:25 am 14. Impossible:

I am hispanic. I refuse to even entertain the idea that ‘hispanics’ (all or most in the USA) are too stupid to see how racist Sotomayor is. I refuse to believe that hispanics (the largest minority in the USA) are so ignorant that if anyone, republican or otherwise, were to point out what is so obviously racist, we would attack/vilify them instead of the actual racist, which in this case, is Sotomayor.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:34 am 15. wildman:

Ruben, Hispanic is not a race so racism has no place in your arguments. If millions of other immigrants came here legally, Learned the language, learned the culture and prospered without massive government intervention, whats the issue with hispanics? You have a simple choice: Either you want to be american like the rest of us or you want to be hispanic. If american, welcome. If hispanic, there are many fine nations of hispanic nature that you can emmigrate to. You are like an unwanted guest that shows up to dinner at my house, demands the meal be cooked to your liking, complains about the seating arragnements, the silverware, the dinnerware and the temperature forgetting the main fact that i did not invite you in the first place.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:35 am 16. George S.:

As I see it the republicans didn’t fight hard enought to stop this arrogant latina.

no one but racists can say that it is deserved. It is precisely your (navarrette) thinking that is flawed.

you can never compromise to greatness. the USA is compromising it’s way to oblivion.

You seem willing to compromise because she is a latina. I will say that makes you a racist too.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:44 am 17. Tolbert:

Shorter Ruben Navarrette -

You Republicans need to pander to us Latinos.

Hey, Ruben. How about we just treat you like individuals, and as an individual you should understand this basic premise about how immigration and employment are linked. We as a nation don’t need two job applicants for every available job opening. Additionally, as an individual you should be able to comprehend that for the long term health of Mexico that sending a good portion of it’s population north isn’t going to erase the economic, societal and political problems that have been long ignored by Mexico’s ruling class. Mexican patriots need to press for change within Mexico rather then laying all their problems on their neighbor.

White sheet Rueben? How about taking a long look in the mirror. Oh, but wait, only white Republicans are capable of racism.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:44 am 18. Gary Ogletree:

Sotomayor should be seen as an emabarrassment to Chicanos. The problem is with the race obsessed members of the Chicano community, the academics and assorted hustlers like Ruben.

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:09 am 19. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Ruben Navarrette Jr.
RE: Anti-WHO?

Republicans would do well to avoid feeding the narrative that they are anti-Hispanic. — Ruben Navarrette Jr.

Why the picture of that ’sexist’/'racist’ in this column?

Talk about ‘projection’.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]

P.S. I’d have voted against her. And why? Because anyone who’s had MORE decision overthrown to the Supremes than upheld is OBVIOUSLY unqualified to be a Supreme herself…..

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:26 am 20. blotto:

It is racists like Navarrette and the others in the progressive left that have doomed this once proud nation.

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:33 am 21. David W. Lincoln:

As long as Latinos hold it against Republicans that
the Republicans are not content with sweeping under the rug, the problems associated with Illegal Immigration, they will tread the path of brokenness that the Black community has trod since it broke for the Democrats.

They are carrying too much of the old country to be as productive as they can be in the United States, and as long as the charge of a Latino saying this is a sign of a Latino “Uncle Tom”, is believable, the Latinos will be cheating themselves, and the United States winds up culturally poorer.

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:47 am 22. UsaBruce:

Mexico had a population of 100,000,000. I suspect that no one would argue that easily 20,000,000 now reside here, many illegally. I am called a racist for being against 1/5th of an entire country moving to mine. I am a racist for resenting the taxes spent while MY country and culture is made secondary to the new arrivals. I am also branded as racist for not appreciating the fact that illegals are registered to vote in my home state of Maryland. How dare I want people to enter my country legally, how dare I love the culture that I was born and raised in, how dare I not support non-citizens having a say in my representation. How dare I be against a racist, proven, anti-anglo to sit on the highest court in the land working against my best interests because I am white. No, to the contrary, the author of this thread is the racist.

Aug 24, 2009 - 7:10 am 23. tanstaafl:

Good lord, Sonia Sotomayor did have some ’splaining to do.

She still does, as a matter of fact.

If Republicans (or anyone else under the sun) are supposed to tread lightly because of her heritage (or risk alienating Hispanics) then it’s game over, anyway.

Didn’t the head of the circuit court question Sotomayor’s vote/ruling in the New Haven firefighter case (Ricci) ? Didn’t he read about it in the newspaper and want a review of that decision ? The decision overturned by the Supreme Court end of June this year ?

Weren’t her recorded statements on the role of courts (”I know, I know, we’re not supposed to say we make policy in the circuit courts…” and the idiocy of the “wise Latina” remark fair game ?

Jeff Sessions asked some probing (and respectful) questions in the Senate hearings. Sotomayor was extremely plodding in her responses, and gave the same non-responses, leadenly, over and over and over.

The rationale she offered for “wise Latina” was weak.

Are you familiar with the abuse heaped on Robert Bork during his own SC hearings ? Should all white men become permanently affronted because Bork was maligned during the SC confirmation process ?

Aug 24, 2009 - 7:32 am 24. Jim Baker:

I don’t give a rip about whatever this Navarette embicile thinks. If, as he says, Latinos are put off by Republicans opposing Sotomayor, fine. But I am pretty sure he has no handle on the attitudes of Latinos or any other collectivist political group just because he has a Latino surname. In fact, I am just sick of finding this mindless drivel in Pajamas Media. Liberals, okay. Mindless people who just make stuff up, forget about it. This is the worst and most poorly researched of all of Navarette’s scribbles.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:02 am 25. BettyBlue:

Uh-huh, we’re never supposed to criticize anything an Mexican immigrant does, even stuff like this: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/huntington-beach-flores-2537478-police-victim

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:03 am 26. Mr Lucky:

13. vivo. “Lumping ALL Latinos into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.”

Could this be true as well?

Lumping ALL conservatives into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.

Use any group in place of Latinos/conservatives. Think Moho… “you people”.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:05 am 27. Chuck:

I have always believed that prejudice and racism was the quality solely owned by the dumb and ignorant in our society. That opinion is now being pushed and challenged in ways I never would have thought possible a few years ago.

It is becoming more and more obvious that nominating any minority to any office is a mistake,inviting race baiters to the public discussion who accuse innocent people who simply disagree of racism.

95% of blacks voted for BO. Is there anybody with a brain that is not going to call that racism. You can’t get 95% of whites to agree on anything. It is blatantly obvious that 95% of the racism in this country is coming from minorities and not the other way around. BO would never have been elected if he was not black and a great speaker.

I heard many Republicans before the Sotomayor hearings state they promised to reserve their judgment until after the hearings.

But our founding father’s never intended for Supreme Court Judges to be confirmed via the results of such hearings which never existed until the 1950’s, but rather on the nominatee’s record and history. On the basis of record and history Sotomayor would not / could not be confirmed.

But who the heck cares about our founding father’s intention these day?

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:05 am 28. Paul from Hamburg:

OK Ruben (or anyone else,
I have asked these questions before, but no one seems to want to answer:

1. Why are Americans whose ancestors came from a Spanish speaking country more important than immigrant whose ancestors came from countries where they spoke Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic?
2. Why are immigrants who speak Spanish more important than immigrants who speak Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic?

Also, shouldn’t “Latino” include speakers of French, Italian and Romanian?

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:07 am 29. marsouin:

It’s not that the GOP or any other faction opposed to the likes of the racially bigoted Sotomayor is problematic, rather, the problem lies in having so many Hispanics, especially their leaders, put racial tribal solidarity before the welfare of ALL Americans.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:13 am 30. Sebastian Shaw:

The Republicans do not have a Hispanic problem; however, the Democrats have no problem lumping different people into various victim classes to appeal to voters. The Democrats always need new victims when many do not simply exist. The Democrats also turn the Republicans into bigots when they ignore their own bigotry by placing people into different classes of gender, race, sexual orientation, & different mixed heritages. The Democrats are the ones with the problem. The Democrats have forgotten we are all Americans.

Sonya Sotomoayor is a bigot, a racist demagogue who deserves the scorn she herself created. She is an incompetent boob who would not be where she is without the bell curve of Affirmative Action. The Peter Principle is at work with Judge Sonya Sotomayor.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:33 am 31. GARY:

Geez you just never stop beating the racial bush to see how many birds or in this case “pajaro’s” fly out. With you its all about race, race, race. If Latinos are pissed at Republicans who voted against Sotomayor because she is a Latina and not thinking about the facts that were loud and clear that she believes in a living Constitution, who wants those kind of voters anyway.
Although I am not a registered Republican and only once in my life time registered as anything other than “undeclared” I have always voted for the conservatives because of their “values” and leanings towards limited government and individual rather than collective rights.

Thank goodness that in reality you do not speak for all Latino’s and your perspective is as you say from your “hardheadedness” which clearly shows through on your insistence in always playing the racial balance card.

Sotoamayor was an extremely bad choice for not only Latinos but for Whites, Blacks and Greens as well. She as will Obama through bad decisions which in the latter case have already bore fruit, will set back racial progress in this country by 50 years.

Instead of encouraging Latinos to lean towards voting for those who recognize the color of your skin or declared racial backround, you need to encourage Latinos to vote for those who recognize real merit no matter what race they come from. Stop re-enforcing racial separation and quit asking for an exception clause. It didn’t work for African-Americans and it will not help Latinos it will only hold them back.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:43 am 32. Dave M:

Dear Ruben, Approximately 43% of hispanics/latinos/whatever were against Ms. Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Why? Because hispanics/latinos/whatever are not a monolith. In fact, it is offensive that you treat them as such. Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent from the Bronx. She has very liitle in common with those of Mexican, Peruvian, Ecuadorian, or El Salvadorian (etc.) descent. In fact, a friend of mine who is from El Salvador confided in me that people from El Salvador look down on Puerto Ricans because they think the Puerto Rican culture is morally lacking (maybe that has something to do with the 43% opposed). I thought that was pretty enlightening because, like you, I had the bigoted assumption that all hispanics/latinos/whatever were the same.

I was not against a “latina” from being nominated to the Supreme Court, I was against Sotomayor’s nomination. She is a bigot and, as a white man, I do not think I would be treated fairly in her court. I base this on her numerous speeches and writings (which occurred over a 10-15 year period) where she indicates just that. She also was a member of racist organizations. Sure, she may have the IQ and résumé to qualify, but her blatant bigotry and bias undermines all of that.

Ruben, you know damn well that if a white nominee had constantly made a “wise white man” crack he would have been pilloried by the establishment media and would never have his nomination approved. In fact, I am quite certain his nomination would be quickly withdrawn and deservedly so.

Furthermore, I thought Republican Senators were too easy on Ms. Sotomayor. Do you think Chuckie Shumer or Teddy Kennedy would have treated a white bigot as honorably? (Yes Ruben, Sotomayor is a bigot.) Did you see the way they treated John Ashcroft (or Robert Bork as stated above)? I guess, according to your double standard, only white men can be questioned harshly; doing it to a latina is just unfair. How patronizing.

Finally, why do you find it a problem that Americans are worried about the changes mass, unmanaged, chaotic, illegal immigration will bring to the U.S.? That worry is eminently reasonable. After all, most of these immigrants come from corrupt, bankrupt, pathologically-dysfunctional countries. We do not want them to bring those problems with them and, with bleeding hearts like yourself, that is exactly what is happening because these immigrants are not forced to assimilate. They are patronized and treated as childern, incapable of learning English. Government programs stifle assimilation as legislative mandates perpetuate English illiteracy thereby ensuring generational poverty. In the end, all that is accomplished is a further balkanization of America. E. Pluribus Unum becomes and stays “us against them”. I am sick of it.

So Ruben, I choose to treat hispanics/latinos/whatever like adults. Thus, when one is a bigot, as Sotomayor is, I will call her a bigot. She is not a child and she deserves to hear the truth, even if she is a “latina”.

In the end, I think hispanics/latinos/whatever want to be treated as adults. And that is what I am going to do. If treating them as adults loses votes for the causes I support, so be it. I will not stoop to your level and treat these people as children just to gain political favor. It’s called having principles and applying them as consistently as possible. It’s the opposite of bigotry. It’s what grownups do.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:52 am 33. savage24:

So voting against Sotomayer will be the downfall of the Republican Party,according to the writer. The Hispanic problem is the Hispanics themselves. They listen to the people that will make slaves of them and reject those that can help them. Sotomayer is out of touch with the American way of life. She doesn’t believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, and now she will rule on that same document. It’s a sad day for America.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:02 am 34. Ken:

So, in summary, Republicans need to embrace bigots like Sotamayor in order to avoid being called bigots. Then we can also appeal to Hispanics who apparently do dumb to understand that illegal immigration is wrong and that some people just aren’t qualified, regardless of their ethnic origin. I don’t believe that myself but apparently Mr. Navarrette does. Count me out on all of the above.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:05 am 35. Paul -Indiana:

It may have come about simply from the convenient land bridge between Mexico and the USA, but the current illegal aliens are more demanding than any other group which may have been cast as ‘illegal’. Illegals aren’t special, just illegal.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:23 am 36. Free Quark:

Finally, why do you find it a problem that Americans are worried about the changes mass, unmanaged, chaotic, illegal immigration will bring to the U.S.?

Americans aren’t worried enough to stop hiring them.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:35 am 37. Jim Rockford:

“A few years ago, it was because of the immigration debate which some Republicans help give an anti-Hispanic flavor while refusing to acknowledge the degree to which the dialogue is propelled by racism, xenophobia, and a fear of demographic and cultural change.”

So it’s the Republican’s fault that the illegal-aliens from Mexico — composed mainly of the poorly educated, the unskilled, and the illiterate — don’t vote for them. The illegals who are running the once great state of California into the ground. See Alex Alexiev’s piece in today’s National Review Online.

The Sotomayor I see is this: At her hearings, if she was not perjuring herself, she was intellectually unqualified to be on the Supreme Court. If she was perjuring herself, she was morally unqualified.

She is the biggest liar ever recommended to sit on the Supreme Court by the biggest liar to ever sit in the Whitehouse as President being cross examined for truthfulness by the biggest gang of liars and phonies that God ever let live.

Navarette’s article is trash; why is it on Pajamas Media?

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:42 am 38. federale86:

Ruben Navarette is a lazy race hustler, unable to make any arguement other than that of his race and that races interest. He does not care about America or the Constitution. Why does PJ continue to publish this anti-Constitution racist?

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:47 am 39. arhooley:

13. vivo:

Lumping ALL Latinos into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.
——————————–
Exactly. That’s why it’s proper to emphasize individual rights (and responsibilities) rather than group rights. That’s why it’s proper to take Sotomayor on her merits, not her race.

Welcome to the Republican party!

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:50 am 40. inspectorudy:

Ruben,
Lets put this issue on a level that I know you will understand. Lets suppose that Sotomayor is a pitcher in the NL and she has a lifetime pitching record of 20 wins and 80 loses do you vote her into the baseball hall of fame? This is her lifetime record against the US Supreme court.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:52 am 41. Walter:

Reuben, why do you even bother? You’ll never get an intelligent or worthwhile response from this group.

This website is a vomitorium for angry, cowardly old nutcases to anonymously voice their ignorant bigoted opinions without the fear of having to be held accountable for them.

These are the people who generally don’t see any problem with Sen. Coburn’s “had some ‘splaining to do” statement, because they generally dislike Latinos in the same way they generally dislike most minority cultures – they see them as yet another group that will take jobs/power/money/culture away from whites.

So in the case of Sotomayor, when a Latina shows that she still keeps ties to Latin culture, immediately the GOP attacks her by creating the suspicion that she this means that she will honor her ties to the Latin community at the expense of the white community. That’s how bigotry works – by convincing Caucasians the not only is the Latin person inherently different, but that those differences are negatives, not positives, and must be suppressed or silenced so that the dominant white culture will not be harmed.

Clearly, no one ever asked Supreme Court Justice Alito if his Italian heritage would preclude him from ruling justly, just as no one asked Justice Roberts if his whiteness would preclude him from ruling justly in a case in which minorities were the .

That’s because the common right-wing misperception, which is shared by the readers of this site and apparently by the GOP in general, is that being white is a qualification, whereas minority status confers “suspect” status automatically.

This is where the “had some ‘splaining to do” statement comes into play. Coburn used a catchphrase from a 1950’s broken-English speaking stereotypical Hispanic immigrant to mock Sotomayor’s heritage because he does not respect her or her heritage. This was a woman who has more federal judicial experience than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years, and yet the GOP was committed to distilling her into some kind of hot-tempered old bruja who secretly hates white people and will use her power to deprive whites of justice.

Yes, it’s completely insane, but this is a value held by GOP and by the denizens of Pajamas Media – that it doesn’t matter how much experience she has, or how intelligent she is. Because at the end of the day, she’s Hispanic, and unless otherwise noted, Hispanics cannot be trusted to uphold the right-wing, white supremacist values of men like Tom Coburn, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan and Newt Gingrich.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:58 am 42. Mike Watts:

40. inspectorudy: “Ruben,
Lets put this issue on a level that I know you will understand. Lets suppose that Sotomayor is a pitcher in the NL and she has a lifetime pitching record of 20 wins and 80 loses do you vote her into the baseball hall of fame? This is her lifetime record against the US Supreme court.”

Inspectorudy, the reversal rate for judge Samuel Alito Jr. was 100% when President George W. Bush nominated him in 2005.

By your analogy, Alito should have been shipped off to the minors, right?

Overall, the Supreme Court reverses about three-fourths of the cases it reviews.

It’s truly shocking how ignorant the people on this website are. I guess that’s the tragic outcome when you have a whole segment of society that gets their news from Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Aug 24, 2009 - 10:17 am 43. Moho:

Ruben–>

I might be one of the last Latinos in the United States to think this way, but I still believe that America’s largest minority would be smart to keep open the possibility of voting Republican now and then.

I think you make an interesting point. This is exactly the strategy that African Americans followed until the Democrats won the race by pushing through civil rights legislation. Before that, Republicans and Democrats vied for the Black vote as a safety net; it was only Democrats who realized that they could begin to win elections by focusing on that demographic. Good luck even talking about anything like that here–the non-racists will have assplosions all over the place because you aren’t post-racial.

Aug 24, 2009 - 10:18 am 44. arhooley:

28. Paul from Hamburg:

OK Ruben (or anyone else,
I have asked these questions before, but no one seems to want to answer:

1. Why are Americans whose ancestors came from a Spanish speaking country more important than immigrant whose ancestors came from countries where they spoke Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic?
2. Why are immigrants who speak Spanish more important than immigrants who speak Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic?

—————————

Paul, I’ll try.

Because “importance” is measured by the volume and shrillness of your complaints about America.

Aug 24, 2009 - 10:32 am 45. Paul from Hamburg:

Arhooley: Good answer. I am a little disappointed that you got it on the first try. I was really hoping Mojo or Walter could explain why we need to give special consideration to the descendants of the conquistadores.

Aug 24, 2009 - 10:56 am 46. urbanleftbehind:

#32

“In fact, a friend of mine who is from El Salvador confided in me that people from El Salvador look down on Puerto Ricans because they think the Puerto Rican culture is morally lacking (maybe that has something to do with the 43% opposed**).”

Oh and I suppose MS-13 is just a bunch of misunderstood undernourished youth? Californians must have reached a new low when they are rooting for Norenos gang to win against the Salvadoran menace:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/20/MN3018MF1F.DTL

**Yes, but it is sad that Sens. McCain, Kyl, Ensign, Cornyn, and Hutchison are painted as racist for their no vote, when they were probably holding out for a Chicano (Mexican-American) nominee.

Aug 24, 2009 - 10:59 am 47. Tolbert:

41. Walter: “is that being white is a qualification”

Yeah, because being white is exactly what got Bork on the Supreme Court.

Oh, wait. It didn’t.

Yeah, because being white is exactly what got Thomas on the Supreme Court.

Oh, wait. It didn’t.

Aug 24, 2009 - 11:27 am 48. WestRight:

#41 Walter says: ‘Reuben, why do you even bother? You’ll never get an intelligent or worthwhile response from this group” WTH Walter, why do you bother and post ageist/racist crap on PJ?
Do you desire a Race War in this country where the vast majority are white and armed? You and your buddy Naverrette are the REAL RACIST on these pages and you deny that Hispanics cannot understand color-blind justice. I think most recognize the damage that putting a Racist on the Supreme Court will do to justice but not you and RN.

This website is a vomitorium for angry, cowardly old nutcases to anonymously voice their ignorant bigoted opinions without the fear of having to be held accountable for them.

Aug 24, 2009 - 12:03 pm 49. Anonymous:

Tolbert. I have to say in the annals of self pwnage, this one takes the cake. Did you know that up until two weeks ago, there had been a total of two non-white supreme court justices. It may not be a qualification for the job, but it certainly doesn’t hurt. Idiot.

Aug 24, 2009 - 12:12 pm 50. myth buster:

Would not a black be justly afraid of the prospect of a KKK member being nominated to the Supreme Court? So too were whites justly afraid of what a La Raza member would do in the Supreme Court. That was what she was being judged on- racist decisions and being a member of a racist organization.

Aug 24, 2009 - 12:27 pm 51. CE londono:

I am a wise latina. I am ashamed of sotomayor. I was borned in a latin coutry and Look at the latin countries do people think we make good judgements? If we do not make good choices down there why would we make good choices here considering that many (most) of the latinos don’t even like this country BUT this Wonderful country “HAS to GIVE them everything because it’s their right” really?

Aug 24, 2009 - 12:33 pm 52. octogalore:

I’m not sure why people aren’t able to look at this while maintaining two non-contradictory points:

1) Navarrette is taking some liberties in saying “Latinos are left to wonder just what more Republicans want in a Latino Supreme Court justice” when despite Sotomayor’s resume, her statements and Ricci ruling provide legitimate concerns.

2) Even given (1), Navarrette’s central thesis is right on: Republicans could use more of the hispanic vote, and would be benefited to get past the “what should be” and focus on the “what is, whether we like it or not and whether it’s fair or not” in strategizing how to get it. Right now, Repubs aren’t on top. Personally, I would like to see Obama out of office. Arguing about people “not getting it” isn’t fruitful; talking about how to appeal to more demographics is.

Aug 24, 2009 - 1:00 pm 53. George S.:

Damn …now I am confused ..is the author Navarrette the troll on this ??

Aug 24, 2009 - 1:07 pm 54. Moho:

George. So you’re saying opposing views confuse you?

Aug 24, 2009 - 1:53 pm 55. Tolbert:

Anonymous,

The point, besides the one on your head, is that Bork didn’t get a free pass because of skin color and neither did Thomas because of his, Sotomayor, if subjected to the same questioning would have been rejected out of hand.

What was that someone said once? “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character”

I suppose that in your world that doesn’t apply to white conservatives or minorities that stray from the Democratic Party Plantation.

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:01 pm 56. Moho:

Tolbert: if Hitler were alive today, he’d probably be the most prolific quoter of MLK.

And anyway, are you one of his children? Because it seems like he was saying that he hoped that black people would no longer be subjected to being judged by their skin color. Whether you know this or not, that wasn’t exactly the problem of white people at that point. Idiot.

Aug 24, 2009 - 2:14 pm 57. EscapeVelocity:

No matter what the GOP does, they will be villified by the left as anti (fill in the blank group) in order to divide the electorate win elections and destroy Western Civilization.

Maybe you have missed the last 50 years, but the plan has been in action for a very long time.

The Left found the New Proletariat to destroy Western Civilization with.

Aug 24, 2009 - 3:36 pm 58. g76monte:

S.S.D.D. …ruben, try a new narrative, you might like yourself a little more if you spent less time crying like a 5 year old.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:03 pm 59. Moho:

Escape velocity:

Maybe you have missed the last 50 years, but the plan has been in action for a very long time.

Yeah, they really cranked it up when they got us mired in two wars and tanked our economy. That was really divisive of those damn democrats.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:20 pm 60. Calvin Ball:

I’m going to coin a law; I’ll name it Navarette’s law, even though a certain POTUS also come to mind. This law only applies to minorities; whites need not apply:

Those who can, do. Those who can’t, pimp race.

And those who can do neither, troll.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:40 pm 61. tanstaafl:

#41, Walter

Clearly, no one ever asked Supreme Court Justice Alito if his Italian heritage would preclude him from ruling justly, just as no one asked Justice Roberts if his whiteness would preclude him from ruling justly in a case in which minorities were the.

Clearly, neither Justice Alito nor Justice Roberts had ever publicly (& repeatedly) stated that an wise Italian male or a clever Caucasian male would (they hoped) more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina who hadn’t lived that life. Neither one, either, had made public statements to the effect that courts do (haha) “make policy”.

Some of the junk levelled at Alito (I recall not what) during his hearings was far more brutal than the kid glove treatment Sotomayor received.

I watched the Sotomayor hearings closely, day 2 was the day she spoke the most. It was worse than watching paint dry.

If that’s wisdom on parade, we’re in deep sh!t.

Hispanics cannot be trusted to uphold the right-wing…

That’s your projection, sweet pea. There are many bright Hispanic individuals, on all sides of the political spectrum.

Sonia Sotomayor doesn’t appear to be one of them.

Aug 24, 2009 - 4:59 pm 62. George S.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTmbcyeZ9ic&feature=related

it is all in this short clip ..why trolls, or most democrats keep using the same arguments regardless of what they are shown.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:03 pm 63. LVMB:

My conservative mother’s “ethnic origin” is Hispanic or Latin or whatever label you want. She is an American…no hyphen. Period! She has had this conviction since she was a teen (early 60’s). She’s never used her “race” as a right for special considerations.

Aug 24, 2009 - 5:57 pm 64. Mr Lucky:

56. Moho , “Because it seems like he was saying that he hoped that black people would no longer be subjected to being judged by their skin color.”

Wasn’t MLK referring to people of any color?

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:01 pm 65. mhr:

Hispanics, ie Americans whose forbears came from Mexico, Cuba, Argentina, Peru, Spain etc are free to vote Republican for whatever reason. I do so because I resent Democrats putting me in a group that they can look down on with condescension, little victims that they can woo with “special programs” like affirmative action, which in their minds proves their inferiority. Sure conservatives can be real pains as well but I don’t need anyone to like me. I am an American and believe in responsibility, taking care of oneself and one’s children, hard work and hard study. If anyone wants to label me inferior I want them to do it looking into my eyes. I have lived a long life and by and large the thousands of people I have met and worked with have been upstanding people, honest and straight-forward. My study and hard work put me on the same level as most of them and earned their respect. When I was a boy most of those men treated me like one of their own. I know that most Americans are good people and unlike liberals who believe that this country has much to apologize for, I feel nothing but gratitude that I had the good fortune to be born an American.

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:51 pm 66. Orange Lion:

Apparently Mr. “Jr.” thinks the Republicans should be more “moderate” like that idiot McCain. That is why the Democrats control Congress and The White House. Republicans need to get back to the core base of Hard Core Conservatives and The Real Conservative Latinos will follow. The only “Wise Latino Woman I need to know is my wife a Wise Conservative Latino Woman. And in my book that makes here 100 times smarter than Justice Sotomayor.

Aug 24, 2009 - 6:53 pm 67. Northern Light:

I have found the issue of the GOP and the Hispanic vote very interesting.

George W. Bush won about 20-25% of the Hispanic vote. It might not sound like much, but at the moment, according to polls I’ve seen, the GOP is scoring in single digits among people who identify themselves as Hispanic. So whatever is happening right now, it seems the GOP is losing support among people who call themselves Hispanic.

The reason this is so fascinating is that there are a lot of Hispanics who are devout Catholics. They must be anti-abortion and disgusted by the idea of same-sex marriage.

As well, lot of America’s small business owners are Hispanic. This group of small business owners must not be crazy about taxes or over-regulation.

So what you have is a group that should be ideal ground for the Republican Party. Yet GOP support among Hispanics is fast approaching the percentages Republicans score among African-Americans.

I noticed an awful lot of the comments here threw around the word racist, but nobody seems to be focusing on the important question of what the Republicans can do to increase their support among Hispanics. If a solution isn’t found, the GOP might find themselves finishing second in an awful lot of elections.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:13 pm 68. inspectorudy:

#42
As I said I was trying to put into a perspective that Ruben could understand. I figured most of us knew all of the major reasons to not vote for Sotomayor and a little sarcasm might be needed. But as usual liberals don’t understand sarcasm and immediately revert to name calling and ad hominem attacks. You are a victim of your own lack of intellect.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:16 pm 69. Tolbert:

Moho:

“… if Hitler were alive today, he’d probably be the most prolific quoter of MLK.”

Wow! you really have bought a oneway express ticket to crazytown.

Aug 24, 2009 - 8:49 pm 70. Kipling:

First of all, I’m sure the Democratic Party will be willing to do for the Hispanic community exactly what they have done for the African American community – families destroyed, continual and systemic poverty, abandoned children, high crime rates and a high representation in prison, etc. Nothing but glory days ahead in that direction.

The future of the Hispanic community lies with the conservatives, who share their social principles and traditional values. Immigration laws must be enforced and the rule of law must be upheld. However, there is always room for people with a stong work ethic. Too bad we can not rid ourselves of current citizens who do not live up to the same standard as many of the immigrants.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:51 pm 71. Kipling:

As far as racism goes, I am sick and tired of being called a racist because I support law enforcement and border security.

If the Hispanic community would like to sell out its tradtional values and wed themselves to a Democratic party which supports the opposite of everything they hold dear simply because they might get something more from the Democrats, then their fate is sealed. Character and virtue should outrank political perks any day. Republicans are not perfect but surely conservatives and hispanics can work together on many issues.

Aug 24, 2009 - 9:59 pm 72. Steve Sampson:

Thank you mhr, you are an American we can all be proud of, well, excluding the Marxists of course. You have lived the American dream and you are surely an inspiration in your neighborhood. I hope to read more from you in the future. G-d Speed, my friend!

Aug 24, 2009 - 11:00 pm 73. vivo:

26. Mr Lucky:

“Could this be true as well?

Lumping ALL conservatives into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.”

Yes, there are rabid right-wingers, moderate conservs, and mildly liberal conservs.

Aug 25, 2009 - 2:56 am 74. tanstaafl:

Thanks for writing, LVMB and mhr, exactly echoing my take on the “identity politics” quagmire in which the Left swims.

The notion that any single individual should be applauded (or derided) simply as a function of genetic makeup/heritage is perfectly absurd.

And yes, mhr, the condescension implicit in the Left’s entire agenda “little victims that they can woo with “special programs” like affirmative action” should make any man or woman shudder.

Aug 25, 2009 - 6:24 am 75. apodoca:

Ruben, you’d better wise up and tell your fellow Hispanics (when will they just be Americans?) that whether or not Sotomayor speaks Spanish is irrelevant. What matters is her ideology and how she’ll rule from the bench. Her judicial record is unimpressive one because of the number of her reversals. If Hispanics want to play the race game, the GOP doesn’t need them. I didn’t hear any Hispanics protesting over what the Democrats did to Miguel Estrada. Wasn’t he Hispanic, too? Estrada is Conservative, and the liberals in the Spanish language media no doubt shaped the attitude of the Hispanic community to him as they did to Sotomayor. From what I’ve heard, the Spanish language media is just as bad as the English language media because they only present the Democrat viewpoint.

It’s high time that Spanish speakers learned English so they can hear both sides of the argument for themselves instead of being spoon fed drivel by the liberals at Unavision and elsewhere.

Just as I see no reason for the GOP to pander to people in the black community, I don’t think they should lick boots in the Hispanic community. This idea of a monolithic black or Hispanic community only serves to leave its people at the mercy of unscrupulous politicians. If that’s what Hispanics want, well, rejoice.

From your comments and from what I know of Spanish language media, let the Hispanic community get off its duff and start asking what can we do for America instead of what can some party do for me. Asking that question has served the black community really well y’ know.

Aug 25, 2009 - 7:25 am 76. Moho:

Tolbert: Yes, that’s there’s no other way to get here.

Aug 25, 2009 - 8:03 am 77. Paul -Indiana:

25. BettyBlue: The story related in that link indicated that, that man, like many Muslims, can’t cope with a fully grown woman. He has to try dominating a child.

Aug 25, 2009 - 9:25 am 78. jdtrue:

Maybe the better title for a article on this subject is “The Hispanics’ GOP Problem” – Hispanics (and blacks, Jews, single women, the elderly for that matter) have ignored the GOP based on the myth that the Democrats are their friends. In fact just the opposite is true. The GOP’s problem is not in pandering to the “gimmee, gimmee, gimmee” wings of these subgroups, but rather in educating them until their eyes are open to the truth of who really cares about them – along with everyone else.

Opportunity to get ahead in society is always squelched by big government. Just ask the 2000+ children in DC who have been cut out of a decent education by the progressives who have taken over pretending to know the “better good.”

Aug 25, 2009 - 9:41 am 79. Dave M.:

# 46. Thank you urbanleftbehind, you made my point exactly. El Salvadorans look down on Puerto Ricans as immoral and you, in defending Puerto Ricans, attack El Salvadorians concerning their criminal enterprise MS-13. Hispanics/latinos/whatever are not a monolith. Thanks again for making my point.

Aug 25, 2009 - 9:41 am 80. Brendan Kelly:

Northern Light, wisely said “The reason this is so fascinating is that there are a lot of Hispanics who are devout Catholics. They must be anti-abortion and disgusted by the idea of same-sex marriage.

As well, lot of America’s small business owners are Hispanic. This group of small business owners must not be crazy about taxes or over-regulation.

So what you have is a group that should be ideal ground for the Republican Party. Yet GOP support among Hispanics is fast approaching the percentages Republicans score among African-Americans. ”

I can’t agree more, and I have to say that the reason for that is, as Ruben wisely said” Latinos are already inclined to think that the GOP is hostile to them because of the debate over immigration and affirmative action…”

I’m Irish/English mix, but I was born in Albuquerque, and I grew up with friends named Chavez, Cisneros, Baca, etc. and I’ll take a stab at giving arhooley an answer.

1. Why are Americans whose ancestors came from a Spanish speaking country more important than immigrant whose ancestors came from countries where they spoke Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic?

Well for one reason they were her first. Santa Fe, San Diego, San Antonio, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Albuquerque, San Augustine, these cities were not founded by wandering tribes New Yorkers. Look at your history and see just how much of the USA was taken from Mexico after the Mexican War. That land wasn’t wild fronteer, it was inhabited and settled, with churches, hotels, ranches, markets, forts and everything. Hispanic people had been living on it, building towns, fighting Indians, and carving farms and ranches out of the wilderness since before the American Revolution, long before in some cases.

So it really isn’t very suprising that someone who’s family first moved to California, or New Mexico, or Texas, or Florida 20 years before John Adams was born gets upset when they are told to “go back to Mexico” by someone who was born in Ohio and who’s grandparents were born in Sweeden or Poland or Germany. (Look it up, Albuquerque was founded in 1706, Santa Fe was almost 100 years old at that time, and John Adams wasn’t born untill 1735.)

Hispanic culture and Hispanic people are a part of the West and the Southwest in a way that is (with the exception of the French in Louisiana and the Native American tribes) unique in America. When the U.S. expanded we didn’t assimilate any Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic cities. Oh there are places where large numbers of people from the same ethnic background settled together (like the Volga-Germans in western Kansas), but that isn’t the same thing as absorbing a pre-exisiting culture where people had already settled the land, built towns and churches, established courts and governments and land titles.

2. Why are immigrants who speak Spanish more important than immigrants who speak Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic? Three reasons.
1) as I stated above, a lot of them AREN’T immigrants.
2) There are a lot more immigrants who speak Spanish than who speak Russian, German, French, Chinese or Arabic, and a lot more people who speak Spanish come to Florida or Texas or California or Arizona or New Mexico to shop than people who speak the other languages.
3) Look at the demographics. Hispanics are not just America’s largest minority group, they are also the fastest growing. NOBODY is going to get elected to ANYTHING without Hispanic votes in the future.

Look at what happened in California when Gov. Davis tried to ride anit-hispanic sentement to the White House with Prop 187. He took a state that HAD been competitive (they elected Reagan Gov. remember?) and turned it into one of the most solid Democratic states, and it is going to stay that way for a least a generation. Prop 187 was not just an epic fail, it was literally SUICIDE for the California Republican Party. Last time I checked the ONLY Republican elected to statewide office in California was the Gov, and running killer robots from the future probably isn’t a good national strategy for the GOP.

Then Tom Trancedo and his dozens of followers all jump up and try to take that same screed national, talk radio jumps on the bandwagon, and the pro-life, pro-family, pro-small business members of the Hispanic community (many of whom have been in this country for hundreds of years) are told to “Go back where you came from!”

Can you see why that is a BAD Idea?

Not only that, it’s not just the Hispanic’s you are loosing. I was a GOP activist and was twice elected precint chair. I became a Libertarian because I no longer wanted to be associated with the stupid and frankly racist cr@p that was being spewed by Trancedo and his supporters. The party that has room for Trancedo has no room for me. I’ll still give to my pro-life causes, and the NRA, but the GOP isn’t getting another dime from me.

Aug 25, 2009 - 10:52 am 81. Mr Lucky:

73. vivo.

“26. Mr Lucky:

‘Could this be true as well?

Lumping ALL conservatives into ONE group is acknowledging total IGNORANCE.’

Yes, there are rabid right-wingers, moderate conservs, and mildly liberal conservs.”

Quite an edit Winston. How’s that sore on your leg doing?

Aug 25, 2009 - 11:33 am 82. EscapeVelocity:

Escape velocity:

Maybe you have missed the last 50 years, but the plan has been in action for a very long time.

Moho said:

Yeah, they really cranked it up when they got us mired in two wars and tanked our economy. That was really divisive of those damn democrats.

—–

Since you couldnt refute the undeniable truth you tried to change the subject.

Exit question:

Should FDR have looked for “the root causes” of the attack on Pearl Harbor? Certainly we provoked those Japs into attacking us…with FDRs foreign policy.

LOL!

Aug 25, 2009 - 12:16 pm 83. Brendan Kelly:

Sorry, but aside from the spelling, (sorry I was on my lunch hour so I had to go with the first draft) I made two errors in my last comment.

1) It was Gov. Pete Wilson who was scapegoating Hispanics, not Gov. Davis. My bad.

2) The Annexation of the Kingdom of Hawaii was similar to when the U.S. took the land from Mexico. There was a functioning society and government in place at that time there. I should have remembered that, I’m a history major!

Lastly, you might want to check out this article from the Hoover Institution The GOP’s California Blues
http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3462081.html

The Hoover Insititution is hardly a group of wild eyed radicals, but even they say that Prop 187, 227, and even 209 were political suicide for the GOP. (While I personally would have supported Prop 209, it is pretty obvious that the vast majority of the support for Prop 187 and 227 was motivated by little more than racisim. That is not what the party of Abraham Lincoln should be about.)

I know it involves actually READING something, something that involves big words and doesn’t have FOXy anchor babes explaining it to you, but I’d recomend it to everyone here.

Aug 25, 2009 - 1:29 pm 84. SukieTawdry:

So, what are the rules here? I must embrace Sotomayor’s elevation to SCOTUS even though I find her “wise Latina” judicial activism repugnant and disqualifying or run the risk of being labeled “anti-Hispanic?” Likewise, I must embrace affirmative action and treating people who cross our borders illegally like they are honored guests entitled to all the services and benefits our nation extends to its citizens and legal residents or risk being labeled “anti-Hispanic?” I guess that’s kinda like having to embrace the statist Obama’s plans to reduce the free-born citizens of the United States to indentured servitude or run the risk of being labeled an anti-black racist. Well, no sale. I opposed Sotomayor and still do and I opposed Obama and still do. I will continue to oppose affirmative action and run-amok illegal immigration. If that makes me an anti-Hispanic, anti-black, anti-immigration bigot, then so be it. The more you peddle this crap, the less effect it has.

And, may I ask, do Hispanics have no standards beyond their Hispanicity? Does that trump everything else always? I find that hard to believe, but that seems to be what you’re implying. And if it is, that’s a sad commentary, a sad commentary indeed.

Aug 25, 2009 - 2:26 pm 85. tanstaafl:

…racist cr@p that was being spewed by Trancedo and his supporters.

It’s TANcredo. Tom. And, as far as I know, he has basically asked (over and over) that the existing, in place immigration laws of the nation be enforced.

This is not an unreasonable position, I hope you realize. I have heard people of Mexican American descent make precisely the same point as Tom TANcredo relative to people entering the US and living in the US illegally.

Aug 25, 2009 - 3:54 pm 86. Northern Light:

#85 tanstaafl. I have often thought that the problem with fighting so hard on the illegal immigrant front is that it inspires supporters to go too far.

I have heard many Republicans try to make the serious distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, but then have people who support their views make the whole issue seem a lot more racist than the GOP would like. When Pat Buchanan starts screaming about how terrible and threatening to his very existance it is to make a phone call only to have a machine say “Press 1 for English” he somes across as xenophobic at the very least.

When a supporter of cracking down on illegal immigration starts talking about “Brown-skinned” people it sounds racist because all of a sudden it isn’t illegal immigrants anymore, it’s about skin tone.

Incidentally, I’m a Canadian and two of my friends have gone to the US and worked illegally in the past (don’t worry, they came home). But considering that they were white-skinned Canadians with no noticable accent (eh), nobody in the USA ever asked if they were illegal immigrants. We’re a small country with a healthcare system we like better than the one you have right now (we really do which is why no Canadian politician has ever suggested we go to whatever system you have) so perhaps we don’t sneak into your country in enough numbers to attract border vigilantes the way the southern border does. Goodness, we didn’t even need passports to visit the USA until recently.

Aug 25, 2009 - 4:40 pm 87. M. I. Garcia:

I doubt that I’m the only hispanic who would oppose judges’ being promoted simply because of their last names and leftist agendas; or who opposes Democrats’ encouraging illegal immigration because they think it will increase their constituency; or who disagrees that 51 million aborted babies (disproportionately minorities) represent a sane public policy to be jealously guarded by federal courts.

Mr. Navarrette, I’m an American, and I don’t think advancing Leftist hispanics is good for my country. Or for most hispanics. A few racists may have oppressed minorites in the past. They are a collective zero now. The Left (and Democrats) have done worse by seducing minorities into dependency. And if Republicans keep opposing this, they’re going to keep getting my vote.

Aug 25, 2009 - 5:55 pm 88. Brendan Kelly:

Tom TANcredo, (who incidentally managed to avoid the draft in 1969 by getting a 1-Y psychological/mental health draft deferment; yes your hero is a Section 8 http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3255494 “As a Republican student activist, Tancredo spoke out in favor of the Vietnam War. After graduating from the University of Northern Colorado in June 1969, he became eligible to serve in Vietnam. Tancredo said he went for his physical, telling doctors he’d been treated for depression, and eventually got a “1-Y” deferment”)) introduced the Mass Immigration Reduction Act.

The act would have imposed an indefinite moratorium on immigration to the United States. Under the act, only spouses and children of American citizens would be allowed to immigrate, which Tancredo estimated would amount to 300,000 immigrants annually. The moratorium would last for at least the first five years of the act and, after that, until such time as there were fewer than 10,000 illegal immigrants entering per year. When those conditions were met, immigration would only have been allowed at whatever level the president and both houses of Congress agreed would have no adverse impact on wages, housing, the environment, or schools. When last introduced in 2003, the bill had 11 cosponsors. Organizations that have endorsed Tancredo’s bill include: NumbersUSA, Population-Environment Balance, Carrying Capacity Network, Federation for American Immigration Reform, Negative Population Growth, and the American Patrol. Tancredo introduced the bill in 1999 (H. R. 41), 2001 (H. R. 2712), and 2003 (H. R. 946).

Tancredo did not re-introduce the bill in 2005, but in 2007 he proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to “establish English as the official language of the United States,” (H.R. 19).

These are both not only ridiculious, they are also SIGNIFICANT changes to “the existing, in place immigration laws of the nation”.
I too am a Heinlien fan, but Your statment of his position is factually untrue.

TANcredo is nothing more than an updated version of the old (and aptly named) “Know Nothing Party”. The same folks that put out those “No Irish Need Apply” signs back when MY ancestors first came here looking for work.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing

The Irish Catholics in the NE US are Democrats TO THIS DAY because of the bigotry their ancestors encountered in the 1840s. (I know because some of these folks are my relatives….). Now nothing as bad as the Philadelphia Nativist Riots ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Nativist_Riots) has happened, but that’s not because the “Minutemen” have anything on the mobs of 1844.

My point though is not just that Nativisim is xenophobic, and immoral, and motivated in many cases by racisim. The overarching point is that IT IS POLITICAL SUICIDE. It didn’t work in the 1840s, it only drove the Irish and the Catholics into the Democratic fold, permanently. It didn’t work in California, it only drove the State into the Democratic fold, if not permanently at least for the forseeable future. Taking this policy national in 2008 only resulted in lots and lots of pro-life, pro-business, Hispanic people voting for Obama.

To paraphrase Joseph Fouche “This is worse than a crime; it is a mistake.”

Aug 25, 2009 - 6:10 pm 89. EscapeVelocity:

Brendan Kelley, Do you think that if 40 million gringos moved to Mexico without an invite that it would be racist and xenophobic of Mexicans to support and advocate enforcing their immigration laws?

Aug 25, 2009 - 7:54 pm 90. Anonymous:

Should they welcome their new 40 million gringo friends, give them citizenship, special preferences in hiring and schools, and gerrymander voting districts to disempower latinos and empower the white minority?

PS- California is bankrupt, and all those services that people from Mexico flock too, will soon be gone. Thanks in part to lax immigration enforcement and anchor babies. Maybe they will hoof it back to Mexico, since the gravy train is up. One can only hope.

Aug 25, 2009 - 8:08 pm 91. EscapeVelocity:

Maybe instead of Latinos flooding the borders, we should take the United States to them?

Aug 25, 2009 - 8:21 pm 92. vivo:

39. arhooley:

“That’s why it’s proper to take Sotomayor on her merits, not her race.

Welcome to the Republican party!”

The Rep party does NOT own the meritocracy franchise.

Typical, twisting ideas, lying by omission, swiftboating.

Aug 25, 2009 - 11:00 pm 93. tanstaafl:

Brendan Kelley, Do you think that if 40 million gringos moved to Mexico without an invite that it would be racist and xenophobic of Mexicans to support and advocate enforcing their immigration laws?

Mexico is really tough on foreigners there illegally, and particularly tough if they find any drugs on you, recently lightened up if it’s only a small amount of marijuana.

It’s quite ironic that the US is supposed to welcome some 20 million illegals while Mexico has a problem with even one illegal gringo or gringa.

I have no problem with requiring individuals in the US to use the lingua franca, English. In many places, e.g., Yuma AZ, parts of southern CA, many things are in 2 languages, “abierto” for open the door at Arby’s, “ropa” for clothes in Target etc.

This is simply brain dead pandering, since only an idiot needs a word to open a door or find out where the clothes are in Target.

I love, or loved, Mexico. Even the border towns were fun & relatively safe when I was little, but are now drug ridden hellholes where you need to be watching your back at every second.

There are immigration laws on the books that GWB during his 8 years (pandering to many denizens of his native Texas) did not enforce. John McCain has declared illegals “children of God, too”. During her campaign, Hillary told a man whose woman was hiding in the next room during her stop somewhere in Nevada…”no woman is illegal”.

I find this, and much more, completely insane given that all these individuals are charged with upholding US law. I guess US law doesn’t mean much after a sitting President (William Jefferson Clinton, for those with short memories) could perjure himself under Oath and get away with it.

You want untrammeled immigration from Mexico ? Change the laws. Otherwise, enforce the laws on the books.

Simple stuff, no ?

Aug 26, 2009 - 7:42 am 94. paul_unalaska:

Ruben, I’m not anti-’Latino’. I’m anti-identity politics groveler, appeaser. Sadly, our politicians and the sheeple they speak to, yourself included, are for the aforementioned.

Yet, Sotomayor used this stratagem numerous instances.

I see Latin, Central, South America and Mexico has plenty of ‘wide Latinas’ and wise Latinos in the political ranks. How’s that working out for them by the way?

Aug 26, 2009 - 8:09 am 95. paul_unalaska:

hahaha I meant ‘wise.’ Sorry ’bout that.

Aug 26, 2009 - 8:10 am 96. Rashputin:

vivo – (92)

“The Rep party does NOT own the meritocracy franchise.”

Oh, Bullhockey. Look at the list of Czars “The One” has appointed, now that’s a real meritocracy. Half of those he appointed have never even been in the same room as someone with an expertise in area of concern the appointee is supposed to manage. The other half, at best, once shared a joint with someone with expertise or is radical to the point of total stupidity. They’re political hacks who are supposed to wring cash and subservience out of their fiefdoms.

“twisting ideas”

That’s demospeak for stating all the facts.

“… lying by omission”

That’s demospeak for not ignoring the big, “Top Secret” printed at the top of the breifing you were in when the press asks about it.

“… swiftboating”

That’s demospeak for calling men who were there themselves liars when they tell the truth about your candidate and his infatuation with Scooby Doo Band Aids.

The democrat party is an organized criminal enterprise, nothing more. The fact that they think imposing “national healthcare” as a means to hide their bankrupting of Medicare proves they’re criminal. They want to impose the equivalent of Nazi eugenics, forcing on everyone the same “government care” they suggest for huge numbers of unborn infants. As long as they don’t call it eugenics and hide it under, “what the Secretary may deem necessary”, they think no one will notice. People were not hung by the neck until dead after WWII because they picked a sorry name for their evil methods; they were hung because eugenics is a crime against humanity whether you call it “family planning” and “end of life counseling” or “shooting people in a barrel”.

Your continued support once the cat is out of the bag on their true nature speaks more to your real opinions than to all of your comments about how much democrats and progressives care for people. Their own legislative agenda has now made it official; democrats and progressives care about people so much that they want shed of them when they are not useful to the state. That’s the democrat idea of meritocracy; you merit survival if you’re useful to us.

Have a nice day

Aug 26, 2009 - 8:23 am 97. tanstaafl:

They want to impose the equivalent of Nazi eugenics, forcing on everyone the same “government care” they suggest for huge numbers of unborn infants.

The eugenics thing is really troubling.

It seems to inform the thinking of both Obama’s science advisor, John Holdren, and another “health” advisor, Dr. Zeke, Rahm’s brother.

The mentality is one of heavily micro-managing the human experience, with them as overseers or self-proclaimed smarter people doing the micromanaging.

And, since we started out with Sonia Sotomayor here, she, as well, seems to share a parallel assumption that a wise Latina will arrive at a better conclusion than an old, white dude any day of the week.

Elitist thinking on parade, in all of its permutations.

Aug 26, 2009 - 9:22 am 98. Blackwater:

Racist hispanic illegal aliens and racist hispanic nationalists such as yourself would be wise to be less blatant about your ethnocentrism and your attempt to brazingly reclaim South Western America and other parts of America as Mexican territory. You seriously risk enraging legal American citizens with your blatant leeching and exploitation of our society and with your blatant disresspect for our culture. You and your ilk alienate more and more Americans every single day with your attempts to ethnically cleanse black Americans from your neighborhoods, your rampant crimes of rape, child molestation, murder and drug smuggling. The majority of Americans in both political parties are disgusted by your hostile invasion of our country and you seriously risk pushing beyond the breaking point when even our corrupt politicians are forced to get rid of you.

PS. Pajamas media, please fire this bigoted hispanic nationalist. Some of us have friends and family that were murdered by racist illegal aliens and we don’t appreciate their spokesmen lecturing us. Thank you.

Aug 26, 2009 - 12:47 pm 99. esoj1211:

Blackwater,

Settle your scores the old fashioned way….talk to some Pen-1s or Bloods in the pen and have them shank those guys.

Aug 26, 2009 - 1:08 pm 100. Brendan Kelly:

Escape Velocity asked me “Brendan Kelley, Do you think that if 40 million gringos moved to Mexico without an invite that it would be racist and xenophobic of Mexicans to support and advocate enforcing their immigration laws?”

First of all, Mexico DID welcome gringo settlers to their country in the early 1830s. That’s how Moses Austin, Jim Bowe, William Barret Travis, and Davey Crockett came here (along with hundreds of others).

Now the results of widespread Anglo immigration were somewhat less than spectacular, at least from the Mexican point of view, in that Mexico wound up loosing Texas, and later New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, California, Utah, Nevada, Colorado, etc. to the US before all was said and done.

Since the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, Mexico has had a bit of a grudge against the United States. The fact that they are mired in poverty due to a corrupt socialist (and until recently) one party government, AND have drug gang violence out the yazoo doesn’t help any. They blame the US for most all of their problems, and sometimes they are actually right to do so. (Lets face it, all the drugs that drive the gangs that drive the killings aren’t all being sold in Quebec.) Tanstaafl is right, Mexico used to be really nice, but you don’t want to go to the border anymore.

So that’s partially why, as tanstaafl points out, Mexicans have a problem with Gringos in their country.

To your question about “racist and xenophobic of Mexicans to support and advocate enforcing their immigration laws?” Well that depends on

A) if the law itself is racist and xenophobic
and
B) if they are calling for selective enforcement based on race.

Unlike pretty much everyone I’ve ever discussed this issue with, I’ve actually READ the immigration laws ( Try it, look for Title 8 of the U.S. Code http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sup_01_8.html ) so I can speak from knowledge rather than hyperbole. What you say about California being bankrupt because of ” lax immigration enforcement and anchor babies ” is simply false. California is bankrupt because it is governed by morons, not because people named Juan and Jose and Maria snuck into the State and put up dry wall and bussed tables and mowed yards and then send the $$ back to their family down South so the kids don’t go hungry.

(BTW “Anchor Babies” is also a myth. The INS will and does, every day, deport parents of “anchor babies”, along with their American Citizen children, to nations all over the world. I’ve seen it. The kids are told “Come back when you turn 18″ and given some paperwork and shipped off with Mom and Dad.)

The reason people flock here is NOT “the gravy train” it’s that we have (or had) jobs and a functional economy, most of Latin America doesn’t and hasn’t since their revolution, and kids need shoes and food and roof. Thats it.

This is NOT a “hostile invasion” (I was in the Army and I know a hostile invasion when I see one). This is a case of poor people coming to the USA because they want things like freedom and better life for their kids, and somewhere they got this wierd idea that this is the land of opportunity.

In any case, I don’t think the immigration laws are racisit in and of themselves. Stupid yes, racisit no.

I do think that a lot of people who are down on the border carrying guns and binoculars and acting out their military fantasies under the guise of ” support and advocate enforcing their immigration laws” are racisit and xenophobid. As has been said before, there isn’t any hue and cry about the illegal aliens sneaking in from Canada or Ireland to work here and take our jobs. (Yes they do exist).

Besides as I said before, to say that Tom “I’m to crazy to go to Vietnam” Tranceo and his dozens of followers are trying to support and advocate enforcing the immigration laws is simply untrue. Tracnedo introduced legislation to abolish the H-1B Visa. This may not sound a big deal, but the H-1B is what Microsoft and Google and other high tech companies use to bring in immigrants with special skills so they can hire them. Silicon Valley lives and dies by the H-1B visa, as do a lot of medical companies. Abolishing the H1-B is not only a huge change in the immigration law, it is just mindbendingly stupid.

Why? Here’s an example. I know of a large medical firm that wanted to recruit a particular doctor from India because he was doing cutting edge research on something. (Virology I think). In any case the plan was to hire him, bring him over to the US, build him a big lab, and let him pursue his research here so they could develop a new drug the guy was working on. Well the Doctor wanted to bring his staff that were also working on the project. Wound up being about 30 people in total, not counting family members. Well H-1B’s are hard to get (the government only issues a set number every year, and once the allocation runs out, that’s it, and the allocation is never close to enough, except in a recession). They are also a big hassell to get. Immigration law requires that the company advertise the job they want to hire the immigrant to do and prove that no American is ready willing and able to do the job, amongst other things. Finally the company just said “Hey, why don’t we just outsource this whole operation to India? We can build the lab there for less, he and his staff don’t have to move, we don’t have to keep paying lawyers to fight with the INS, and we can just do the manufacturing offshore?” So that is what they did. The operation created a large number of good, high tech, well paying, non-polluting jobs, and I’m sure that the people in India that got these jobs are very happy to have them.

If you can explain to me how that was a GOOD outcome for America, I’d be happy to hear it.

Lastly, Tanstaafl said “John McCain has declared illegals “children of God, too”. ” in a way that made me infer that he does not agree with that statment. Could someone please explain to me, how a non-racisit, non-xenophobic Christian could disagree with that statement?

Aug 26, 2009 - 1:59 pm 101. EscapeVeloclity:

Brendan, there is no doubt in my mind that Mexicans have a giant chip on their shoulders.

Its about time to get over that, dont you think. Certainly basing US immigration and foreign policy on Mexican pathologies is so silly that you arent suggesting such.

Brendan said:

The reason people flock here is NOT “the gravy train” it’s that we have (or had) jobs and a functional economy, most of Latin America doesn’t and hasn’t since their revolution, and kids need shoes and food and roof. Thats it.

This is NOT a “hostile invasion” (I was in the Army and I know a hostile invasion when I see one). This is a case of poor people coming to the USA because they want things like freedom and better life for their kids, and somewhere they got this wierd idea that this is the land of opportunity.

———

That is why I suggested that maybe we should take the US to them. Its not our fault that Latin American governments have been a dissater. Suggesting that the US is somehow responsible for Latin American failures is soft racism of the common variety on the Left.

Chile has the highest living standards on the continent because they werent debased by Communist leadership. Brazil looks like it has its act together, and the Leftists of the Revolutionary variety have been superseded by a Centrist Left that isnt in ideological lulu land.

I dont wish ill on Latinos, one bit. However open door immigration policy is a disaster. One thing is for certain, I would rather have hard working(mostly) Latino Catholic immigration problem than what Europe has.

The purpose of the hypothetical question is to show the Leftwing line accusing the US of every dastardly deed and thought of the worst kind, especially US Conservatives…is utter tripe.

I would no more call the Mexicans racist xenophobes for enforcing their immigration laws….and conversely the US shouldnt have to wade through the same bullshit in order to have a reasoned rational policy debate, immigration policy, and border enforcement.

This victimization narrative and racial demagoging, race baiting and outlandish accusations doest do anyone anygood. And you can add racist orgizations like La Raza to that list.

Divisive identity politics may be a way to get votes and grab and hold power, like the Democrats are trying to do by villifying Republicans and import foreigners and granting the citizenship for votes….but its reprehensible.

That Latinos would support this and Democrats doesnt speak well for their intentions.

Aug 26, 2009 - 3:39 pm 102. tanstaafl:

“John McCain has declared illegals “children of God, too”. in a way that made me infer that he does not agree with that statment.

Geez, I hafta spell it out ?

McCain, from a state with a high proportion of Mexican Americans (like Bush’s Texas) likely used that phrase during his campaign to pander to Hispanics.

Just like Hillary was pandering when she referenced the man’s wife in Nevada, saying “no woman is illegal”

For such individuals, pandering for votes and upholding the laws of the US seem like mutually exclusive activities.

Our elected representatives are sworn, first and foremost, to uphold the laws of the United States.

If you consider immigration laws “stupid”, you really ought to be lecturing Mexico as well.

Mexico getting its shorts in a knot over illegal gringos and drugs is really pretty funny, given that Mexico has encouraged illegal immigration northwards and given that rife corruption and (drug fuelled) bribery have been endemic to Mexican government for, literally, decades.

Officialdom in Mexico has enormously profited from being a transit point for South American drugs, headed north.

Calderon seems sincere in cleaning up the mess, but he has a huge job on his hands.

Maybe you could explain (or not) why all this time Mexico has failed to build a viable economy, which failure inclines its citizens to look for work across the border ?

Your claim that payouts to illegals in CA (education, medical etc.) hasn’t played a role in tanking the CA economy is patently false.

And you still can’t spell Tancredo.

Aug 26, 2009 - 4:05 pm 103. EscapeVelocity:

Mexico is using its citizens like Robert Mugabe as human ATM machines, exporting labor. They really should be ashamed of themselves pimping their people like that.

I do think that immigration reform in the US should include an expanded guest worker program, a pathway to legality given no criminal record….but it should also demand reciprocation in Mexico as regard their strict laws including property ownership laws. But I see a one way one sided capitulation coming.

It really is shameful.

Mexico would greatly benefit from American immigrants, who would be a boon to their economy, real estate market, property values, jobs market, skill assets, etc ad naseum.

But alas, this is a one way flagelation of certain historical groups and historical grievances that have been fostered, stroked, and stoked, by the Western Left for half a century. The villification has got to stop.

Aug 26, 2009 - 4:44 pm 104. EscapeVelocity:

Not to mention, the diversity that the gringos would bring, that the locals in Mexico could be forced to celebrate.

LOL!

Aug 27, 2009 - 9:38 am 105. Y.:

The President may have the right to choose his judges but don’t our representatives have a right to decline a life-time appointment nominee, purely because they vote their conscience? I personally am fed up with Republicans acting like Democrats and pandering, instead of upholding their ideals. Remember we did have Sen. McCain who was very pro Latino and even sponsored the Amnesty bill and I seem to remember he lost.

Aug 27, 2009 - 11:11 am 106. Brendan Kelly:

Maybe you could explain (or not) why all this time Mexico has failed to build a viable economy, which failure inclines its citizens to look for work across the border ?

Sure I can. Since the end of the Mexican Revolution (1920) until 2000 ONE Left wing political party, the PRI held power in Mexico. Think of what would happen to the US if for 80 uninterrupted years the Obama/Pelosi ran the country. That is pretty much what happened in Mexico. Actually though these guys were worse, it is the Mexican Oil Expropriation of 1938 that Ayn Rand used as a basis for the seizure of the San Sebastián Mines in Atlas Shrugged.

Decades of corrupt left wing government (look at Juarez’s anti-clericalism) followed by decades of corrupt and opressive right wing government, followed by a long and very very bloody civil war (which included the Pershing expidition that failed to catch Pancho Villa) followed by 80 years of corrupt single party left wing government. That’s pretty much why their economy is tanked and stays tankes.

Sorry but it’s not that Hispanics are “undermunchen” or anything. They simply had a really cr@ppy outcome to their last revolution, that’s all.

“Your claim that payouts to illegals in CA (education, medical etc.) hasn’t played a role in tanking the CA economy is patently false.”

No, I’m simply being logical and non-histerical. Take a look at what SNOPES says about just one example. http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/taxes.asp

Look, despite the ridiculious claims FAIR makes, there simply is not any good data on this. It’s all data and assumptions, and when you can make up your own assumptions, you can get any result you want. http://www.fortfreedom.org/b19.htm

What IS known is this. California is $40,000,000,000 in the red, and it has a WHOLE lot more to do with the fact that the State Legislature is run by idiots than it does people named Jose who pick strawberries. Why can I say that? Texas. Texas, (rumor has it) has hosted the occasional illegal alien from time to time, so if you were right and illegals are a big problem, Texas should be falling apart too, right? Well according to the Texas Public Policy Foundation, between 1997 and 2006 Texas’ economy grew an average of 4.3% while California’s grew at a rate of 3.7%. But as of 2002 (to 2007), with tort reform in place, Texas’ annual economic growth jumped to 5%, while California’s remained essentially the same at 3.6%. In fact Texas created more jobs in 2008 than the rest of the states—combined.

California’s problem doesn’t have anything to do with Mexicans, it has everything to do with CALIFORNIANS.

“And you still can’t spell Tancredo.”

True, but then again I really don’t want to.

And could you please explain to me in a non-racist, non-xenophobic way what there is to disagree with in saying that “John McCain has declared illegals “children of God, too”"? Do you not believe that? Aren’t ALL Men created equal? Do you really think that Jesus prefers Gringos?

As for the immigration laws being stupid, have you ever READ them? Anyone who has will agree with me, they are stupid.

On issues of immigration Congress has carte blanche. They can do whatever they want, there are no Constitutional restrictions, there is no body of common law or legal precident they have to follow. This is why we got the Chinese Exclusion Act, amongst other things.

Because of that the immigration law is nothing more than what you can get 51 Senators to agree to. It changes with the political winds, and is often self-contradictory. There is no rhyme or reason to it, there are illogical exceptions carved out by special interests, conflicting policy goals that are included by different interest groups. There is no overall goal, nothing. It is all bureaucratic compromise stacked on political compromise. For a while there courts in one part of the USA were deporting aliens arrested for DWI because MADD was screaming at the local politicians that DWI was “a crime of violence”, but courts in other parts of the country did NOT consider DWI to be a “crime of violence”, so a DWI arrest would be treated under a different part of the immigration law, and you might not be deported for it. You could have two defendants commit the exact same crime in different states, and you wind up with one of them getting his Green Card yanked and he and his family are slammed on a plane back to Fubaristan, and the other one gets a fine and told not to do it again. Any way you slice it, that’s stupid.

I am stunned to say this, but I actually agree with EscapeVelocity about post 103 and 104. It would be a lot better for everyone concerned if Mexico had an honest and competent government. However (to quote Jayne Cobb) “If wishes were horses, we’d all be eating steak”.

Aug 27, 2009 - 2:54 pm 107. Brendan Kelly:

Escape Velocity, your post 101 has a lot to be said for it.

“Taking the U.S. to them” is pretty much what we did back in 1846, and that is why San Antonio and L.A. and Albuquerque are better places to live than Juarez, and Mexico City.

The problem is, in the early 1900s we figured out that we could have an empire on the cheap. The British had gone around the world conquering places and then they got caught by what Colin Powel would later call “the Pottery Barn Rule”, (You break it, you buy it). They wound up having to actually RUN these places, and that got expensive.

What we did was a lot worse. We just put in the dicator dijiour and let him do whatever he wanted to the local people, economy, etc. as long as he kept our corporate interests safe. Thus the Latin Americans got all the bad side of American Imperialisim without any of the expensive hospitals, sewers, schools, or honest courts, or good government that California and Texas and Arizona got.

My 8th Grade history teacher said “It’s a pitty we had to set the border at the Rio Grande, Mexico starts to get really pretty just a few miles further south”. He was kidding of course (we had already annexed 1/3 of their country) but he had a point. The single reason Ciudad Juarez is a mess and El Paso isn’t is because we stopped our land grab at the Rio Grande.

Sadly, I don’t think the USA is going to be in the business of “exporting democracy” for the forseeable future though. It would be a lot easier (and cheaper) to “nation build” in Cuba or Mexico or Haiti than Iraq and Afghanistan and Somalia.

Aug 27, 2009 - 3:04 pm 108. tanstaafl:

…don’t our representatives have a right to decline a life-time appointment nominee, purely because they vote their conscience?

As you likely know, the way the system of confirmation has moved, a President will get his nominee barring said nominee being an out & out criminal.

During her confirmation hearings, Sotomayor attempted to undo her earlier public statements by repeating over and over and OVER that her driving force and pure inspiration is “fidelity to the law”.

This is a judge’s job, fidelity to US law*, rather boring, involving close analysis and tedious brainwork.

We’ll see whether or not fidelity to the law/US Constitution characterizes Sotomayor’s rulings and trumps an attitude towards the law reflected in some of her more off-the-cuff, earlier statements.

*Some justices on the SC, most notably Ruth Bader Ginsberg, seem to have a liking for European law.

Aug 27, 2009 - 4:31 pm 109. tanstaafl:

Texas, (rumor has it) has hosted the occasional illegal alien from time to time, so if you were right and illegals are a big problem, Texas should be falling apart too, right?

Seems like a straw man argument, no logic there.

Anyway, your original claim (as I recall) was that payments to illegals in California was not a factor in the tanking budget in that state.

California has roughly 2.7 million illegal residents, according to an April 2009 report from the authoritative Pew Hispanic Center, accounting for about 7% of the state’s population. State officials estimate that they add between $4 billion and $6 billion in costs, primarily for prisons and jails, schools and emergency rooms. Beyond those services, the illegal population adds to the overall cost of other parts of local government, from police and fire protection to highway maintenance and libraries.

Deficit may trigger anti-illegal immigration ballot measure

Do you not believe that? Aren’t ALL Men created equal? Do you really think that Jesus prefers Gringos?

Now this is just plain dumb, I refuse to spend time going there.

But I’ll tell ya, just for the hell of it, I prefer Mexican Americans to most gringos in my heavily demographic Mexican American county in my heavily demographic Mexican American state.

But I prefer them to be living here legally.

Adios for the nonce.

Aug 27, 2009 - 4:58 pm 110. john from cinncinatti:

how about them Hondurans? you can’t lump them all together. have they voted democrat yet hahaha. i guess maybe no. maybe they are racist against hispanics.

Aug 27, 2009 - 5:47 pm 111. EscapeVelocity:

Brenden Kelley, your historical knowledge of where the US led post WW2 as the leader of the free world, is frankly, so twisted and distorted, you have been propagandized by the Left to such a degree, that you cant make rational decisions…because they are based on historical nonsense.

Aug 30, 2009 - 10:44 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: