If you can say something in non-asshole-speak, please respond. fairleft
As for "asshole-speak," you've, of course, not dealt with what I presented in my original comment, and I've no intention of engaging someone involved with hate groups in anything other than an entirely scornful way.
You can lecture me about being an asshole when you're not hoisting your links from the sheet-wearers. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
In contrast to the leadership of many ethnic advocacy groups, most members of minority groups think immigration is too high. *Hispanics: 56 percent said it is too high; 7 percent said too low; 14 percent just right. *Asian-Americans: 57 percent said immigration is too high; 5 percent said too low; 18 percent just right. *African-Americans: 68 percent said it is too high; 4 percent said too low; 14 percent just right. Most members of minority groups do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration as many ethnic advocacy groups argue; instead, members feel it's due to a lack of enforcement. *Hispanics: Just 20 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 61 percent said inadequate enforcement. *Asian-Americans: 19 percent said not enough legal immigration; 69 percent said inadequate enforcement. *African-Americans: 16 percent said not enough legal immigration; 70 percent said inadequate enforcement. Most members of minority groups feel that there are plenty of Americans available to fill unskilled jobs. *Hispanics: 15 percent said legal immigration should be increased to fill unskilled jobs; 65 percent said there are plenty of Americans available to do unskilled jobs, employers just need to pay more. *Asian-Americans: 19 percent said increase immigration; 65 percent said plenty of Americans are available. *African-Americans: 6 percent said increase immigration; 81 percent said plenty of Americans are available.
*Hispanics: 56 percent said it is too high; 7 percent said too low; 14 percent just right. *Asian-Americans: 57 percent said immigration is too high; 5 percent said too low; 18 percent just right. *African-Americans: 68 percent said it is too high; 4 percent said too low; 14 percent just right.
Most members of minority groups do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration as many ethnic advocacy groups argue; instead, members feel it's due to a lack of enforcement.
*Hispanics: Just 20 percent said illegal immigration was caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 61 percent said inadequate enforcement. *Asian-Americans: 19 percent said not enough legal immigration; 69 percent said inadequate enforcement. *African-Americans: 16 percent said not enough legal immigration; 70 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Most members of minority groups feel that there are plenty of Americans available to fill unskilled jobs.
*Hispanics: 15 percent said legal immigration should be increased to fill unskilled jobs; 65 percent said there are plenty of Americans available to do unskilled jobs, employers just need to pay more. *Asian-Americans: 19 percent said increase immigration; 65 percent said plenty of Americans are available. *African-Americans: 6 percent said increase immigration; 81 percent said plenty of Americans are available.
http://cis.org/Minority-Views-Immigration fairleft
The least reliable poll of 2008. For good reason.
Do you know anything about polling? I'm assuming not.
Compare with a real poll by Gallup. You'll note most Americans are either satisfied with current immigration levels or would support more.
For purposes of re-education (since I have some background in how to do this): Note the absence of politically-loaded questions designed to lead the respondent to an answer -- answers the wingnuts who commissioned this abortion of a survey wanted -- in Gallup's survey, the use of random sampling, rotated questions, phone calls rather than a database of people who go out of their way to participate.
You know, all things professional pollsters use when their checks aren't being cut by Newsmax and pseudo-academics.
You might as well be posting one of those moronic web polls that cable channels take. But at least those don't claim to be scientific.
Next. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122057/Americans-Return-Tougher-Immigration-Stance.aspx fairleft
What we need to do now is put a moratorium on all legal immigration, curb illegal immigration, stop the use of H1-B, and other work visas
Recommended reading:
New User Guide: What are comments' ratings and how do I use them?
1 is used to rate a comment "trollish", i.e. disruptive of dialogue, or grossly insulting, or really inappropriate. Such ratings should never be used to indicate that you disagree with the comment. If in doubt, wait until another member uses this thankfully seldom used warning. 2 is a warning that is used for comments that are unnecessarily aggressive or disruptive in their tone. Such ratings should never be used to indicate that you disagree with the comment. Again, if in doubt, wait and see what other members do. There are usually experienced members around to quickly spot such comments. Remember that you or the commenter might be having a bad day, you or the commenter might have misinterpreted something (very easy on a forum in English where many don't have English as first language), you or the commenter might have made a snark or bon mot the other didn't get. Also read the ETiquette. Count to 10 and think before using. Or ignore.
2 is a warning that is used for comments that are unnecessarily aggressive or disruptive in their tone. Such ratings should never be used to indicate that you disagree with the comment. Again, if in doubt, wait and see what other members do. There are usually experienced members around to quickly spot such comments. Remember that you or the commenter might be having a bad day, you or the commenter might have misinterpreted something (very easy on a forum in English where many don't have English as first language), you or the commenter might have made a snark or bon mot the other didn't get. Also read the ETiquette. Count to 10 and think before using. Or ignore.
But what, exactly, is Tanton's vision? As long ago as 1988, when a series of internal 1986 documents known as the WITAN memos were leaked to the press, Tanton's bigoted attitudes have been known. In the memos, written to colleagues on the staff of FAIR, Tanton warned of a coming "Latin onslaught" and worried that high Latino birth rates would lead "the present majority to hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile." Tanton repeatedly demeaned Latinos in the memos, asking whether they would "bring with them the tradition of the mordida [bribe], the lack of involvement in public affairs" and also questioning Latinos' "educability." Echoing his 19th-century nativist forebears who feared Catholic immigrants from Italy and Ireland, Tanton has often attacked Catholics in terms not so different from those used by the Klan and the Know-Nothing Party of the 1840s. In the WITAN memos, for instance, he worried that Latino immigrants would endanger the separation of church and state and undermine support for public schooling. Never one to miss a threatening and fertile Catholic, Tanton even reminded his colleagues, "Keep in mind that many of the Vietnamese coming in are also Catholic." The leaked memos caused an uproar. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Walter Cronkite quit the board of a group Tanton headed, U.S. English, after the memos became public in 1988. U.S. English Executive Director Linda Chavez -- a former Reagan Administration official and, later, a conservative commentator -- also left, calling Tanton's views "anti-Hispanic, anti-Catholic and not excusable."
As long ago as 1988, when a series of internal 1986 documents known as the WITAN memos were leaked to the press, Tanton's bigoted attitudes have been known. In the memos, written to colleagues on the staff of FAIR, Tanton warned of a coming "Latin onslaught" and worried that high Latino birth rates would lead "the present majority to hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile." Tanton repeatedly demeaned Latinos in the memos, asking whether they would "bring with them the tradition of the mordida [bribe], the lack of involvement in public affairs" and also questioning Latinos' "educability."
Echoing his 19th-century nativist forebears who feared Catholic immigrants from Italy and Ireland, Tanton has often attacked Catholics in terms not so different from those used by the Klan and the Know-Nothing Party of the 1840s. In the WITAN memos, for instance, he worried that Latino immigrants would endanger the separation of church and state and undermine support for public schooling. Never one to miss a threatening and fertile Catholic, Tanton even reminded his colleagues, "Keep in mind that many of the Vietnamese coming in are also Catholic." The leaked memos caused an uproar. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Walter Cronkite quit the board of a group Tanton headed, U.S. English, after the memos became public in 1988. U.S. English Executive Director Linda Chavez -- a former Reagan Administration official and, later, a conservative commentator -- also left, calling Tanton's views "anti-Hispanic, anti-Catholic and not excusable."
So it's no simply labeling - Drew provided evidence. His 'tone' was appropriate in his first comment where you MIGHT have a basis for troll-rating him in that comment. Your other troll ratings in this thread are not acceptable. Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
In 1994, Tanton's Social Contract Press republished an openly racist French book, The Camp of the Saints, with Tanton writing that he was "honored" to republish the race war novel. What Tanton called a "prescient" book describes the takeover of France by "swarthy hordes" of Indians, "grotesque little beggars from the streets of Calcutta," who arrive in a desperate refugee flotilla. It attacks white liberals who, rather than turn the Indians away, "empty out all our hospital beds so that cholera-ridden and leprous wretches could sprawl between white sheets ... and cram our nurseries full of monster children." It explains how, after the Indians take over France, white women are sent to a "whorehouse for Hindus." In an afterword special to Tanton's edition of the novel, author Jean Raspail wrote about his fears that "the proliferation of other races dooms our race, my race, to extinction." Tanton's view of the book he published? "We are indebted to Jean Raspail for his insights into the human condition, and for being 20 years ahead of this time. History will judge him more kindly than have some of his contemporaries."
Tanton's view of the book he published? "We are indebted to Jean Raspail for his insights into the human condition, and for being 20 years ahead of this time. History will judge him more kindly than have some of his contemporaries."
Now tell me again how quoting this guy's groups are in any way acceptable to progressives? Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
I thought Europe was being taken over by Muslims. What's going on here? En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
SPLC smear campaign purpose is to stifle debate After the collapse of the Senate amnesty bill in 2007, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) joined with the National Council of La Raza and others to launch a campaign to smear the three largest mainstream groups making a case for tighter enforcement and lower immigration. At the center of this campaign was the designation of the Federation for American Immigration Reform as a "hate group" and the spread of that taint to Numbers USA and the Center for Immigration Studies. The announced goal was to pressure journalists and policymakers not to meet or speak with these organizations. Touted as an effort to "stop the hate," it was a thinly disguised move to stifle debate.
After the collapse of the Senate amnesty bill in 2007, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) joined with the National Council of La Raza and others to launch a campaign to smear the three largest mainstream groups making a case for tighter enforcement and lower immigration. At the center of this campaign was the designation of the Federation for American Immigration Reform as a "hate group" and the spread of that taint to Numbers USA and the Center for Immigration Studies. The announced goal was to pressure journalists and policymakers not to meet or speak with these organizations. Touted as an effort to "stop the hate," it was a thinly disguised move to stifle debate.
http://cis.org/Announcments/SPLC-Immigration-Panel fairleft
I'd suggest that you keep in mind that a good number of people here have no respect for national borders or nation states at all, so you'll need to take that into account. You should also keep in mind that you'll be needing evidence and a chain of logic to avoid getting skewered here.
Meanwhile, I don't see any prospect of this diary generating anything other than heat, so I'm closing comments in the most appallingly high-handed fashion you've ever seen.
A bit rehearsed, actually.
Here's a good rundown of Tanton's work on PFIR.
But that name. The staffing guy. Roy Beck.
Roy Beck. Roy Beck. Roy Beck.
Now where have I heard that name before?
Oooooohhh, I remember:
That Roy Beck! The one who's a higher-up in the Council of Conservative Citizens!
Wait, wait, you guys are gonna love this.
What is the Council of Conservative Citizens, you ask?
The Council of Conservative Citizens is the descendent of the -- wait for it...White Citizens' Councils. Those of Klan-Era fame.
Lucy, joo go' sohm esplainin' to do.... Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
Quoting from this nexus of rightwing anti-immigrationists is not doing your argument any good. It's hard to take it as a progressive point of view when you're backing it with cites from these people.
Darwin's theory of evolution and Ernst Haeckel's recapitulation theory were large influences on Hall's career. These ideas prompted Hall to examine aspects of childhood development in order to learn about the inheritance of behavior. The subjective character of these studies made their validation impossible. His work also delved into controversial portrayals of the differences between women and men, as well as the concept of racial eugenics. . . . Hall had no sympathy for the poor, the sick or those with developmental differences or disabilities. A firm believer in selective breeding and forced sterilization, Hall believed that any respect or charity toward those he viewed as physically, emotionally, or intellectually weak or "defective" simply interfered with the movement of natural selection toward the development of a super-race. Hall's social vision was a socialism of the right, a blueprint for the future German National Socialism that arose just a few years after his death.
Hall had no sympathy for the poor, the sick or those with developmental differences or disabilities. A firm believer in selective breeding and forced sterilization, Hall believed that any respect or charity toward those he viewed as physically, emotionally, or intellectually weak or "defective" simply interfered with the movement of natural selection toward the development of a super-race. Hall's social vision was a socialism of the right, a blueprint for the future German National Socialism that arose just a few years after his death.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Stanley_Hall
In any case, Tanton appears to be the victim of a smear campaign, as I've noted elsewhere, and appears not to exercise any control over nor hold any office within CIS.
http://cis.org/About
What about the substance, that it is a good idea to restrict immigration during a period of very high unemployment? Seems like you're avoiding arguing on substance. fairleft
Tanton appears to be the victim of a smear campaign
If you're going to insist on that, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously enough to debate the idea?
A founder and first President of the American Psychological Association was a eugenist and believer in forced sterilization
I'm sorry, but I seem to have lost the thread of this. I didn't see anyone here quote Stanley Hall as a role model, what did I miss?
Given that you're accusing others of avoiding arguing on substance, throwing out random comments about irrelevant and long-dead eugenicists seems a bit weird. In fact, it could leave you open to accusations of trying to avoid answering the very specific points that have been made to you about Tanton.
La Raza, too, now? Oh, good. We've got some Dobbsian crazy coming. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
Next he'll get on the "La Raza's name means The Race, and that means they're racists" nonsense. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
Awkward, like you don't even believe it, but that it pays the bills.
I's jess sayin'. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
dangerously left populist and naturally popular
Well, you're probably right. These things sound even better if you say them wearing a brown shirt. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
In addition, the fellows at pffugee camp said it even more explicitly
But of course, the nazi mentality prefers to make scapegoats out of the powerless... Yes, Failreft, I anticipated your hard right turn. Not that that was hard to see developing. Go for it. I wont make fun of you. Just disappear this bogus blognality and show up as someone else on the other side. This is exactly what happend on the "left" in 1920s-30s Germany. You think those millions of Nazi supporters just came out of nowhere?
Yes, Failreft, I anticipated your hard right turn. Not that that was hard to see developing. Go for it. I wont make fun of you. Just disappear this bogus blognality and show up as someone else on the other side. This is exactly what happend on the "left" in 1920s-30s Germany. You think those millions of Nazi supporters just came out of nowhere?
I'm sure the militias are in there somewhere, too, this being a Michigan-tied group.
It's a lot the same people making up these groups. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
We can walk through afterwards and count the troll ratings.
