Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Jose, San Diego, Las Vegas, California, Colorado, San Bernadino, Santa Barabara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo, Palo Alto, Nevada, Pueblo, St. Augustine, Galveston, Sierra Nevada, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Las Cruces, Los Alamos, Alamogordo, San Anyonio, El Paso, Amarillo, San Marcos, Texas, Laredo, Rio Grande….

The folks are just coming home. Enjoy it.

THERE WOULD BE EXCEPTIONS,if this fantasy were ever to come true./….but people are tired of it all,we cant afford it…HERE IS AN IDEA,GO HOME AND FIX YOUR OWN COUNTRY THAT HAS TONS OF NATURAL RESOURCES, A HUGE SWATH OF LAND WITH MOUNTAINS,DESERTS,JUNGLES THOUSANDS OF MILES OF PORT ACCESS TO 2,YES 2 DIFFERENT OCEANS,AND WHAT THE HELL HAS ANYONE EVER DONE????………..NOTHING!….WELL SOMEONE OUGHT TO ! IF as much effort was put into fixing Mexico,yes Mexico than was sneaking across the border to be exploited by greedy pigs,while at the same time breaking the back of tax payers,then there would be no need to come here. ……………….How bout this slogan…”deport all illegals to SOUTHERN MEXICO” 1,500 miles south…

False. I did not “endorse” mass deportations. Either quote my “endorsement” or retract the allegation.

“Walls, which you endorse, are fascist.”

Walls are fascist! What about roofs? Are roofs fascist? Floors? Do you know what “fascist” means? It does not mean “anything the Left dislikes”. It has a very specific meaning, actually, and does not describe “walls”. Sorry.

” The culture you admire so much – this Anglo culture, is fictional”

Sorry – Anglo culture is not “fictional”, it is indeed alive and well in England, much as American culture is alive and well in America, French culture is alive and well in France, German culture is alive and well in Germany etc. Because you wish it were not so – because you wish to commit genocide and erase the American people from existence – does not make it so. I am an American myself, and I assure you that I exist.

“This is a capitalist nation – it needs cheap labor badly – and it gets it right next door. As I said earlier: The ‘illegals’ are here because the US wants them here.”

Already refuted.

“The US wants them here”

Already refuted.

“The best thing that can be done to help the American worker is to raise minimum wages and for cities to pass ‘living wage’ laws. Wages in the US have fallen abysmally over the decades (to the capitalist’s delight). Many jobs now done by foreign labor – legal or illegal – would be taken by Americans if the wages were right.”

I agree with you to an extent. We need to severely penalize companies that hire illegal invaders, and remove them as an option. Then, companies will have to raise wages in order to attract actual Americans.

“The US is not divorced from the political economy of Mexico. At the behest of the US and under intense political pressure, Mexico folded its public employment tent and slowly (or rapidly some might say) privatized its economy – AND opened up its economy to goods previously kept out (like US corn). As a result, the massive and highly paid public sector dumped its workers, especially those in PEMEX the government owned petroleum company, and screwed its corn farmers by lifting subsidies to let American corn in. Average wages in Mexico have been on the decline ever since, replaced by maquiladora wages and conditions near the US border. Mexico’s economic progress was halted in its tracks and Mexican workers have been streaming in ever since.”

Entirely irrelevant. It is the sole right of the American citizenry to determine who may and may not enter our country. No treaty or trade alliance exists that allows Mexican citizens to claim US land, apart from those who have entered in accordance with the laws enacted by the American people through their elected representatives in Congress.

“The English did not settle in an empty pristine continent – they did not come in peace – and that original sin of ethnic cleansing precludes any talk of what is right or not coming from a supporter of these sins.”

I couldn’t care less about those “sins”. If anyone cares to settle grievances they are free to do so at the UN or elsewhere. To repeat: Mexican citizens have no recognized right to American land. Sorry – you can’t get around that *fact*.

“It is futher complicated by the fact of enslavement and subjugation of corvee labor. On these grounds, the US has forfeited any right to the pretense of a static Anglo culture based in 19th century mythology”

False. No court on earth recognizes this imaginary forfeiture of rights. Sorry again. Now, I have comprehensively annihilated every argument you have proffered, and you have failed to substantively counter my refutations, ergo they stand, inviolate and impregnable. The “rights” and “forfeiture” you carp about are entirely imaginary – fictional – and do not exist in the real world. Your attempt to deny the existence of my people – your denial of our very *right* to exist – is genocidal and obscene. You are a hate-filled bigot whose paltry “arguments” rest upon vague assertions of non-existent “rights” and ancient grievances that are entirely irrelevant to the discussion.

This is a capitalist nation – it needs cheap labor badly – and it gets it right next door. As I said earlier: The ‘illegals’ are here because the US wants them here. They are here because the multitudes of Chambers of Congress want them here, they’re here because consumers want cheap goods and services, they’re here because capitalists don’t want to raise wages to levels that Americans would take the jobs – that would cut into profits. The US wants them here for economic reasons but you blame the immigrants for coming.
The best thing that can be done to help the American worker is to raise minimum wages and for cities to pass ‘living wage’ laws. Wages in the US have fallen abysmally over the decades (to the capitalist’s delight). Many jobs now done by foreign labor – legal or illegal – would be taken by Americans if the wages were right. As it stands, its easier for a person to get by on a spouse’s wage rather than accept the little remunerative return on time and labor of a low-wage job.
The US is not divorced from the political economy of Mexico. At the behest of the US and under intense political pressure, Mexico folded its public employment tent and slowly (or rapidly some might say) privatized its economy – AND opened up its economy to goods previously kept out (like US corn). As a result, the massive and highly paid public sector dumped its workers, especially those in PEMEX the government owned petroleum company, and screwed its corn farmers by lifting subsidies to let American corn in. Average wages in Mexico have been on the decline ever since, replaced by maquiladora wages and conditions near the US border. Mexico’s economic progress was halted in its tracks and Mexican workers have been streaming in ever since.
The English did not settle in an empty pristine continent – they did not come in peace – and that original sin of ethnic cleansing precludes any talk of what is right or not coming from a supporter of these sins. It is futher complicated by the fact of enslavement and subjugation of corvee labor. On these grounds, the US has forfeited any right to the pretense of a static Anglo culture based in 19th century mythology.

I literally have no idea what you’re talking about here, or what your point is.

“But hey – I’m not suggesting anybody be sent back anywhere – just that you can’t refer to those treaties as if god signed them”

I wasn’t – I was referring to them as if they are established international law, which they are.

Sorry.

“and secondly, YOU DO want to send ‘illegals’ back”

Correct.

“so don’t make it out to be me that’s trying to deport people.”

But you are – you want to replace Americans with foreigners. You want to ethnically cleans large swaths of America and repopulate it with another people. In other words, you want to commit genocide.

“the Mexico-US border is not going to change anytime soon, but these people – legal and illegal – are here at America’s behest”

Actually the illegals are here against the wishes of the American people, as every poll on the subject – in addition to the laws enacted by the people’s Congress – will attest.

Sorry.

“but your solutions are kick ‘em out and build an Apartheid wall.”

Absolutely. And I’m sorry, but that won’t work with me – I haven’t been fully brainwashed into recoiling from certain words, so I couldn’t care less what you call it. America has a border, the sovereign American people have the right – legal and moral – to say who can and who cannot come in. I propose building (and guarding) a wall across that border, and more American agree all the time.

“English culture is not even English culture any more.”

How absurd. While you’re absolutely wrong, I think it’s important to note what your silly arguments reveal. The charge is often made against the radical left that they are anti-American and anti-Western, and your “arguments” are proof of guilt. You have already eradicated the American (and now the English) people in your mind by denying their existence. You are, in a very real sense, attempting to commit genocide. Not that this bothers you – hate-filled bigotry and genocide go hand in hand, and always have.

“The national cuisine of England is Indian food”

That’s not true, really. The national cuisine of England is English food.

“the fastest growing religion is Islam.”

I know – what a horrible travesty.

“The US has been separating itself from English culture even before the Declaration of Independence”

That’s worded poorly. It has not been “separating itself”, which implies a conscious decision. It has been evolving independently from English culture, though from common roots.

“it has had a huge African component since day one and for that reason alone (never mind the process of ethnically cleansing the native population) it cannot be considered and offshoot of English culture.”

This is really idiotic. I understand that you would like to wipe the American people from the earth, but just saying we don’t exist does not make it so. That African slaves were owned by Americans – and I can’t believe I have to explain this – does not mean those Americans did not exist. Romans owned Gallic and Germanic slaves – that does not mean the Roman people, or Roman culture, did not exist.

“My attachment is TO the people of this country”

According to you there are no people of this country. You have committed mental genocide against them.

“not to some obsolete notion of an unchanging Anglo-America or some silly melting pot ideal where no matter what country you come from you should become this mythological Anglo.”

No, not an “Anglo”, an “American”. See above for the definition of what that is.

“You don’t get it do you – this is a country increasing in diversity with each passing day.”

Exactly – and that is something we need to begin to reverse if Americans wish to survive as a people.

“There are sections of this country where English is almost never spoken. There are sections of this country where Anglos won’t even go. There are cultural identities in America that have NOTHING to do with being Anglo.”

Correct. They also have nothing to do with being American. Again, being an American citizen and being an American are not the same thing. Again, if I were to become an Ethiopian citizen tomorrow, I would not be “an Ethiopian”. I’m sorry, but you simply cannot argue against that. You’re fighting a battle you have already lost.

“That Cuban and Salvadoran and Chinese and Frenchman did not arrive here yesterday they’ve now been here for years, maybe decades – and they are America too. And in fact, America cannot and will not do without them.”

Of course we can. We did without mass alien immigration for long stretches of our history, and it’s high time for another, frankly.

“What you think of as immigrants having acculturated to their Anglo spiritual ancestors is precisely the opposite. The Anglos of this country have acculturated to all those cultures that have come after.”

That statement is so silly as to almost not warrant a response. It’s quite obvious that, for instance, the Polish immigrants in the early 20th century assimilated into American culture and became Americans, as we Americans do not speak Polish or adhere to Polish cultural practices. Here’s what’s funny – you *know* that you have no argument. You can’t really argue that there is no such thing as an American, and that “American” is meaningless. It’s like arguing that there are no Frenchmen, that there are no Iranians etc. Which is to say that it’s profoundly silly and childish. It’s the equivalent of plugging your ears and yelling “Na na na I can’t hear you!”

“Building a wall is fascist.”

Really. Demonstrate that it is “fascist.” I sincerely doubt you understand what that word means.

“That America is becoming increasingly Latino is a result of a first-world nation being juxtaposed to a third world nation and NEEDING their labor in a capitalist environment. There will be no major moratorium on immigration because America will come to a halt without them.”

That’s really a ludicrous myth. And as the American economy crumbles, as China stops lending us money, and as our service-based industry disappears, Americans will need those jobs for themselves, and a majority of them will demand to be allowed to exercise their sovereignty in order to preserve their culture and people.

“And yes, you are oblivious of the fact that large portions of the southern 13 colonies were up to 50% African”

It is not I who have denied there were Africans here – it is YOU who deny there were (and are) Americans here. You deny our existence as a people – you are a hate-filled, racist, genocidal bigot.

“and that Native Americans thoroughly inhabited the East Coast before they were ethnically cleansed.”

Yes – that was sad. Still, history is chock-full of atrocities, and life is not fair.

“That means the US was IN FACT, always a hybrid culture”

You’re not very good at this. Because different peoples inhabit the same culture does not mean that they share the same culture. Sorry.

“ and that the Anglos immediately forfeited any moral high ground on establishing an Anglo culture.”

I couldn’t care less about “moral high ground.” I have already proven that Mexican citizens have no recognized “right” to American land, and you have failed miserably to refute it.

I fail to see how that is relevant.

WHY? So you can conveniently ignore the fact that you stole their land?

But hey – I’m not suggesting anybody be sent back anywhere – just that you can’t refer to those treaties as if god signed them and secondly, YOU DO want to send ‘illegals’ back, so don’t make it out to be me that’s trying to deport people. The Mexico-US border is not going to change anytime soon, but these people – legal and illegal – are here at America’s behest, but your solutions are kick ‘em out and build an Apartheid wall.

English culture is not even English culture any more. The national cuisine of England is Indian food – the fastest growing religion is Islam. The US has been separating itself from English culture even before the Declaration of Independence, it has had a huge African component since day one and for that reason alone (never mind the process of ethnically cleansing the native population) it cannot be considered and offshoot of English culture.

My attachment is TO the people of this country – not to some obsolete notion of an unchanging Anglo-America or some silly melting pot ideal where no matter what country you come from you should become this mythological Anglo. You don’t get it do you – this is a country increasing in diversity with each passing day. There are sections of this country where English is almost never spoken. There are sections of this country where Anglos won’t even go. There are cultural identities in America that have NOTHING to do with being Anglo. That Cuban and Salvadoran and Chinese and Frenchman did not arrive here yesterday they’ve now been here for years, maybe decades – and they are America too. And in fact, America cannot and will not do without them.

What you think of as immigrants having acculturated to their Anglo spiritual ancestors is precisely the opposite. The Anglos of this country have acculturated to all those cultures that have come after.

Building a wall is fascist. That America is becoming increasingly Latino is a result of a first-world nation being juxtaposed to a third world nation and NEEDING their labor in a capitalist environment. There will be no major moratorium on immigration because America will come to a halt without them.

And yes, you are oblivious of the fact that large portions of the southern 13 colonies were up to 50% African, and that Native Americans thoroughly inhabited the East Coast before they were ethnically cleansed. That means the US was IN FACT, always a hybrid culture – and that the Anglos immediately forfeited any moral high ground on establishing an Anglo culture. So with the arrival of millions of Latinos to the US – the Indians have returned in force. A just due.

Correct. So you agree with my statement that “They (Mexican citizens) have no legal right to do so (reclaim demographically what was taken politically).” As it would be impossible to undo all of history’s perceived injustices (entailing, as it would, shipping the English back to Germany, the Amerindians back to Asia, the French back to the steppes and the whole lot of us eventually back to Africa, ironically) what the civilized world has agreed to do is settle international differences of opinion (such as what “rights” certain peoples have to certain lands) before a world senate, which (I should add) has not awarded any land to the Mexican people via their elected representatives.

“We should understand that from the day the Anglos first betrayed Native -Americans by reneging on treaties and promises, and from the day the Anglos first brought over boatloads of kidnapped Africans, all resort to this being rightfully an Anglo country was forfeited”

Correct – it is not an “Anglo country”. My genetic ancestors were not English, but my cultural ancestors were. America is a country with citizens descended from many peoples. Still, American culture is an offshoot of English culture (and lucky for it, frankly). That’s what a people, or a nation, is, you know – a group who share a common culture. And is it not a man’s duty to maintain, cultivate and preserve his culture, and therefore people?

“In fact, all notions of what being an ‘American’ means was immediately forfeited as well”

I’m sorry, but that’s absurd. I am sorry for you, that you feel no attachment to a people – I imagine you are one of these poor, deracinated cosmopolites, placeless and alone. That is the wreck modern corporate/leftist culture has made of modern man – culturally nihilistic and suicidal.

“A Cuban in Little Havana is an American, so too is a French-Canadian in Maine, and a Salvadoran in California, and the descendent of Chinese corvee labor where ever she may be”

Hahaha. Seriously though, there’s a distinction between American citizenship and an American cultural identity. Much as there is between French citizenship and French cultural identity (a French citizen is not necessarily a Frenchman). If I were to become an Ethiopian citizen tomorrow, that would not make me an Ethiopian. Honestly what are you doing arguing about anything if you don’t understand that? Obviously a middle-aged Swiss mountaineer who has received citizenship that morning isn’t a cultural American. He would, if he had any sense, be horrified at the notion. He is Swiss – what is the plural of that? Switzerman? He is a Swiss (?) who is an American citizen.

“Even besides the enslaved Africans and vanquished Indians, this country began to change dramatically as soon as boatloads of Catholics from Ireland began to arrive. And then boatloads of Italian Catholics, and Jews, Slavic-language Catholics and Orthodox – and Greek Orthodox. And German and Scandinavian Lutherans. What the meaning of ‘American’ is has changed over time – and will continue to change”

Not really. American culture was certainly affected by their arrival and their assimilation into American culture, but that doesn’t contradict what I’ve written: an American is and has always been a descendant of the original Anglo settlers (of the United States! not of California) and those who came after that assimilated into their culture to the extent that they were then culturally indistinguishable from the descendants of those Anglo settlers). That the culture of the people I’ve described (descendants of the original Anglo settlers *and those who came after that assimilated into their culture*) has been changed by immigration is a given. All cultures experience change, of course.

“So in the end, what you call consider Anglo, and what you consider to be an English-speaking land, are likely to be passing phases”

Haha. I won’t argue with you there!

“I’ll have to say it again – its the Hispanicization of the US you decried – “Absolutely” – you didn’t care if it was legal or not”

Yes – I decry the replacement of the American people. I do not, as I’ve stated, object to immigration out of hand. I do not wish to deport the immigrants we’ve taken in. I do believe, however, that immigrants to a land should become part of the people who have taken them in rather than construct an insular cultural faction, and that the extremely high amount of immigrants we’ve taken in, in tandem with the perpetuity of the influx and the extremely high percentage that come from cultural backgrounds more similar to each other than they are to ours, makes said assimilation more difficult. A moratorium on legal (and obviously illegal, via a border-wall) immigration is in order for the socioeconomic reason I mentioned. Once we have assimilated the legal immigrants (and in all likelyhood the illegals as well) we can reassess whether economic (we are in the worst depression since the Great one, our service-based industry will be going belly-up and we our not the sort of industrial powerhouse – bursting with factory work for low skilled immigrants – we once were) and cultural (corporate culture is homogenizing, cheapening and stifling American culture, doing violence to its maintenance and cultivation) conditions warrant new immigration.

“It would seem that as you are oblivous to the non-white inhabitants (in very large numbers!) of what became the 13 original states your analysis of what American means has more to do with race than culture.”

I’m not really sure what you’re referring to. I am not at all oblivious to Amerindian tribes or African slaves, or anyone else. I’m quite intimate with early American history, actually. And I can assure you that the Indian tribes, who fought so long for their land and liberty, did not think of themselves as “Americans” – the idea would insult most of them, I should guess. And to imply that American blacks do not have their own culture is, frankly, scandalous.

We should understand that from the day the Anglos first betrayed Native -Americans by reneging on treaties and promises, and from the day the Anglos first brought over boatloads of kidnapped Africans, all resort to this being rightfully an Anglo country was forfeited. In fact, all notions of what being an ‘American’ means was immediately forfeited as well. A Cuban in Little Havana is an American, so too is a French-Canadian in Maine, and a Salvadoran in California, and the descendent of Chinese corvee labor where ever she may be. There is no American in some 13-colonies sense. Even besides the enslaved Africans and vanquished Indians, this country began to change dramatically as soon as boatloads of Catholics from Ireland began to arrive. And then boatloads of Italian Catholics, and Jews, Slavic-language Catholics and Orthodox – and Greek Orthodox. And German and Scandinavian Lutherans. What the meaning of ‘American’ is has changed over time – and will continue to change. You cannot legislate it – and you can’t wall it out because this country – this economic system requires boatload after boatload of immigrants. So in the end, what you call consider Anglo, and what you consider to be an English-speaking land, are likely to be passing phases. If you go back more than 500 years all languages here were Native-American. Then you have the growth of Spanish speakers, then Dutch, Swedish, French and then – ONLY then – English speakers. Now the nation is English speaking with a large Spanish-speaking minority, and pockets of French and assorted other immigrant languages. Anglos and the English language have no historical or geographical guarantees.

I’ll have to say it again – its the Hispanicization of the US you decried – “Absolutely” – you didn’t care if it was legal or not.

It would seem that as you are oblivous to the non-white inhabitants (in very large numbers!) of what became the 13 original states your analysis of what American means has more to do with race than culture.

“The Anglos came later and stole the land through war and coercion (and had NO LEGAL RIGHT TO DO SO)”

The Treaty of Cahuenga and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo etc ceded said territories legally to the United States, and are recognized as such under international law (which is to say “legally”).

Sorry.

“Absolutely. What American wouldn’t resent the de-Americanization of America?”

Indeed – what American wouldn’t?

“So like I said, Carmen doesn’t realize that “Americans’ don’t want her here either.”

*sigh*

On the contrary, and as I have stated, I am happy to have Carmen here, and for legal Hispanic immigrants to stay in perpetuity and become Americans.

“As if you had a lock on what is American”

I don’t “have a lock” on anything. I’m merely noting what an ethnic (unhyphenated) American is. It is someone whose ethnicity is “American”, which is to say the descendants of the original Anglo settlers (of the United States! not of California) and those who came after that assimilated into their culture to the extent that they are now culturally indistinguishable from the descendants of those Anglo settlers in whatever region the reside. That’s a fairly uncontroversial statement, I think.

There were no original Anglo settlers in these parts of the US with Spanish names. These lands were inhabited by Indians, and then Spanish speakers largely with Indian blood in them. The Anglos came later and stole the land through war and coercion (and had NO LEGAL RIGHT TO DO SO). And to be accurate, these people are no less American than you are – and in fact, given the ten to twelve thousand years they have been here – they are the most native people to the region of all.

If you want to make the argument that the native natural people of the Americas can be excluded because the US has the military might to do so – that’s one thing. But you can’t make the argument that the Anglos were the original settlers – nor the argument of law. These lands were not won by law – they were won through violence under the ideology of “Manifest Destiny.” As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

And it bears repeating that you said – in response to the notion of resentment of LEGAL Latino immigrants, “Absolutely. What American wouldn’t resent the de-Americanization of America?” So like I said, Carmen doesn’t realize that “Americans’ don’t want her here either. (As if you had a lock on what is American.)

Of course not. I did not write, nor did I imply, that *those areas* were settled by Anglos. I was defining what an ethnic American is.

“There is NO TIME in the last 450 years that these lands were not inhabited by non-Anglos.”

I fail to see how that is relevant.

“And at no time were any of these lands ceded to the Anglos as a friendly gesture. They are just reclaiming demographically what was taken politically.”

They have no legal right to do so, fortunately. The laws enacted by the American people, through their representatives in Congress, rule here, independent of the ancient cultural grievances and sour grapes of foreign peoples.

“PS to Carmen – See? Toddard doesn’t want Hispanics here, legal or not.”

Also not true. I am perfectly happy to have all Hispanics here legally become Americans and stay in perpetuity. What I have called for is a moritorium on *all* immigration, from Mexico, Anglo-land, Sweden and elsewhere. Leave it to a grievance hustler to resort to PC thuggery to distort my (very clearly and honestly laid out) position. Such tactics usually imply an inability to make one’s arguments honestly, on its own merits.