i liked it when you could go outside and greet a well dressed neighbor who is mowing the lawn.

now you go outside and greet the mexican mowing the lawn next door and get a "que?" in return.

5/11/2006 7:34:16 PM

GIT R DUN!!!

5/11/2006 7:38:17 PM

^^^
In Mexico they just had "Nothing Gringo" day. How many Nothing Spic days have we observed?

5/11/2006 7:44:17 PM

Quote :

"^because a small radical portion always represents the whole"

i say this exact thing when people say white people are racist

[Edited on May 11, 2006 at 8:12 PM. Reason : .]

5/11/2006 8:12:25 PM

Yesterday, I jokingly said this:

Quote :

"Looks like it's time for Americans to be making more babies to avoid this. I'd say immigration control, but we know that won't be happening."

Today, John Gibson (the guy with the hair on Fox) was serious about this.

Quote :

"Procreation Not Recreation Thursday, May 11, 2006 By John Gibson Make more babies. That's the lesson drawn out of two interesting stories over the last couple days. First, a story Wednesday that half the kids under 5 years old in this country are minorities. By far, the greatest number are Hispanic. Know what that means? Twenty-five years and the majority population is Hispanic. Why is that? Hispanics are having more kids and others, notably the ones Hispanics call gabachos — white people — are having fewer. Now in this country, European ancestry people — white people — are having kids at a rate that sustains the population, even grows it a bit. That compares to Europe where the birthrate is in the negative zone. They're not having enough babies to sustain the population. Consequently, they are inviting in more and more immigrants every year to take care of things, and those immigrants are having way more babies that the native population. Hence Eurabia. Why aren't they having babies? Because babies get in the way of a prosperous and comfortable modern life. Peanut butter fingerprints on the leather seats in the BMW. The Euros in particular can't be bothered with kids. To underscore that point, a second story Thursday reports that Vladimir Putin is so concerned about the declining, no imploding population of Russia he is paying couples to have babies. Imagine: Procreating for cash in Mother Russia. Putin has to take this step because at the rate things are going, Russia will lose 45 million people in the next 45 years. Russia will be at two-thirds of today's population. This is not a good trend for Russia, and it won't be here either if it should happen. To put it bluntly: We need more babies. Forget that zero population growth stuff of my poor, misled generation. Why is this important? Because civilizations need populations to survive So far we're doing our part here in America, but Hispanics can't carry the whole load. The rest of you: Get busy. Make babies. Or put another way, a slogan for our times: Procreation not recreation. That's My Word."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195193,00.html

5/12/2006 12:40:24 AM

No, it would be 50% Latino. By then they'd be American.

5/12/2006 10:02:33 AM

i wanna move to russia

i would love to be part of a declining population

imagine how much cooler america would be with 2/3 the population

5/12/2006 10:10:41 AM

as long as they all look like Salma Hayek, im good.

5/12/2006 10:26:30 AM

^ they won't.

5/12/2006 11:13:58 AM

^

Procreation, not recreation? I'm game, I hate rubbers!

5/12/2006 1:19:59 PM

Quote :

"imagine how much cooler america would be with 2/3 the population"

As an undercover economist, I suspect America with 2/3 the population would have a lower living standard and be less technologically advanced both in absolute terms and relative to other nations.

5/12/2006 1:22:08 PM

^racist statement

5/12/2006 1:47:55 PM

Quote :

"Summary: On The Big Story, John Gibson urged viewers to "[d]o your duty. Make more babies," because he had found out, from a recently released report, that nearly half of all children under the age of five in the United States are minorities. Gibson added: "You know what that means? Twenty-five years and the majority of the population is Hispanic." Gibson later repeated: "To put it bluntly, we need more babies.""

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605120006

freak.

5/12/2006 2:32:19 PM

Quote :

"As an undercover economist, I suspect America with 2/3 the population would have a lower living standard and be less technologically advanced both in absolute terms and relative to other nations."

5/12/2006 2:47:47 PM

I don't care about percentages and whatnot.

But I do care about the children. I really, really do not like (I was going to use the word "despise" but that's a little harsh) it when people have 4+ children that they cannot care for adequately. I don't care if it's cultural, religious, or whatever, but some people need to stop making babies. I'd never attempt to enact legislation to this end, but I'd totally take out PSAs that reminded people how dumb and selfish it is to have children that they can't care for.

5/12/2006 2:58:47 PM

Quote :

"In Mexico they just had "Nothing Gringo" day. How many Nothing Spic days have we observed?"

Well, we've pretty much consistenly had days where Hispanic immigrants were treated like second class citizens since...well, ever. So they have some catching up to do.

Or do you think they would be having that day if we gave everyone a level playing field?

5/12/2006 4:42:48 PM

Quote :

"Or do you think they would be having that day if we gave everyone a level playing field?"

What, are you saying they would be better people if only we were better people?

Not to mention "Two wrongs don't make a right"

What, just because the President of Iran is calling for the destruction of Israel does that make us morally "forgiven" for calling for the destruction of Iran?

5/12/2006 6:48:54 PM

^No, I think he is saying that that day would never exist if it weren't for the second class citizen treatment.

Not that hard to understand.

5/12/2006 6:55:27 PM

^ Ok, so, why does us being assholes mean they can be assholes?
More importantly, how does us not being assholes guarantee that they won't be assholes?

Are Mexican's special, are they pure of heart and would never have thought of racism without first seeing it practiced among their neighbors to the north?

5/12/2006 7:55:03 PM

It's an expression of contempt and disgust with second class treatment.

It's not "Oh, well, you were jerks, so we're gonna be jerks too."

It's "Hot damn, I'm pissed, and I have a right to be pissed. And, because I lack the means to do anything real, I'm gonna do this."

5/12/2006 8:11:41 PM

It's fighting racism with racism, which doesn't solve anything.

5/12/2006 8:40:15 PM

See, I don't think it's fighting anything. It's just a bunch of pissed off people with no power, talking shit.

I'm normally outraged at shit like this, but I've never been able to muster anger towards oppressed, powerless people lashing back.

5/12/2006 8:48:09 PM

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605120017
listen.

AHAHAHAHAHAH

Quote :

"SAVAGE: What will it take to wake you up to the fact that you are being erased from the future of America? And why are you being erased? If you're a person of European descent, why do they want your child to be a minority in America? And when your little girl is a minority in America, what will happen to her? Tell me what will happen to her? Do you think that the minorities, when they take over the country, will be quite as benevolent and as enlightened as the European-Americans are today? Or do you sense that just perhaps, just maybe, they will not bring the learnings of the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, to their new power? ... SAVAGE: Now, then, the question becomes in 20 years, what will America look like? And, what is the social landscape like? And what happens to white people? That's the real question here. Will our brown brethren, who are so nationalistic and so anti-gringo and anti-Anglo, be as enlightened as the European-American is? I don't think so. Do you? "

....people like Amsterdam718

[Edited on May 12, 2006 at 9:23 PM. Reason : iyut]

5/12/2006 9:21:39 PM

Yeah, but Savage isn't really serious.

5/12/2006 11:34:20 PM

Quote :

"I don't care about percentages and whatnot. But I do care about the children. I really, really do not like (I was going to use the word "despise" but that's a little harsh) it when people have 4+ children that they cannot care for adequately. I don't care if it's cultural, religious, or whatever, but some people need to stop making babies. I'd never attempt to enact legislation to this end, but I'd totally take out PSAs that reminded people how dumb and selfish it is to have children that they can't care for."

I totally agree with you on that.

As far as illegal immigrants, here's a thought for you: WHY DON'T A WHOLE LOT OF US MOVE TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY, WORK FOR A WHILE, AND THEN DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF THAT COUNTRY CHANGE THEIR LAWS FOR US.

Yeah...thats the ticket

5/13/2006 12:09:18 AM

Quote :

"What, are you saying they would be better people if only we were better people? "

"Better people" is a loaded phrase. But most -- not all -- of the time, people won't be assholes to you if you aren't assholes to them. This is more a "Do unto others" thing than a "two wrongs" thing.

Quote :

"What, just because the President of Iran is calling for the destruction of Israel does that make us morally "forgiven" for calling for the destruction of Iran?"

This isn't just an issue of morality, it's an issue of cause and effect. If you don't want the Mexicans pissy at us, don't get pissy at the Mexicans. If you think you have a right to be pissy at the Mexicans, go ahead, but don't act all surprised and indignant when they return the favor.

That said, our treatment of immigrants is wrong, and sometimes the only way to convince people that what they are doing is bad is to do it to them. Is it necessarily right? No. But it can be very effective.

If I thought the immigrants were demanding an unjust change, I wouldn't be for them, but I would still understand their tactics. As it is, they are demanding a thoroughly right and just claims, so I'm both.

Quote :

"More importantly, how does us not being assholes guarantee that they won't be assholes?"

It doesn't guarantee anything, but that's the way to bet. Change might not be instant, but my money says it would probably come sooner rather than later.

Quote :

"are they pure of heart and would never have thought of racism without first seeing it practiced among their neighbors to the north?"

Of course not. But in recent and more racially enlightened times, you don't really see them practicing it in this particular fashion until we've been a pack of bitches for long enough.

Quote :

"It's fighting racism with racism, which doesn't solve anything."

It may be the case that the strategy is ineffective -- in fact, it almost certainly is. All their little day has done is to make people like you more opposed to them, and make it harder for people like me to defend them.

What it does not do is make Mexico into a country of racists and xenophobes on the order of the United States sometimes (although other things they do may acheive that end).

Quote :

"WHY DON'T A WHOLE LOT OF US MOVE TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY, WORK FOR A WHILE, AND THEN DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF THAT COUNTRY CHANGE THEIR LAWS FOR US."

The changes they demand aren't simply for their benefit (although that is their immediate motivation to pursue them). They are for the benefit of liberal democracy, freedom, the American people, and really the whole world.

5/13/2006 12:47:55 AM

Quote :

"The War on Immigration Will Fail by Wade A. Mitchell, The Ludwig Van Mises Institute Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 Let's look at the problem of immigration from another angle. There exists a market demand for low-skilled cheap labor. Part of this demand is being met by outsourcing of jobs overseas. The rest is met by vast numbers of immigrants coming to this country. Illegal immigration is the market supplying a demand. A demand is being met and satisfied. When viewed this way, how is this a problem? This triumph of the market is not in itself a problem. This can only be viewed as a problem when the illegal immigrants expect goods and services from the state that existing residents must pay for. These come in many forms: hospitalization, cash payments, affirmative action privileges, public schools (that's a huge one), voting rights, and a range of political demands that impinge on people's expectations concerning language, security, and political cohesion. Then there is the problem of the justice and security system in this country, which doesn't even work for residents, much less for poor immigrants. In other words, nearly all problems associated with immigration that appear to be demographic in nature are actually problems associated with regime intervention in what would otherwise be a peaceful trading environment. A single state ruling over a polyglot territory is an inherently unstable mix; add a vast welfare and regulatory state to it and you have an explosive situation on your hands. We can expect many new calls for a war on immigration. And guess what the result of that will be: a vastly larger state, which will only make the existing problem worse. History will teach us everything we need to know about starting a so called "War on Illegal Immigration." The US government has been somewhat less than successful with other "wars." Let's look at it beginning with the "war" on alcohol. The 18th Amendment to the US Constitution brought us Prohibition. During this time, the government tried to stop the manufacture, distribution, sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages. At least the citizens at that time had enough respect for the constitution to realize that no such authority existed and they passed an amendment giving the Fed's the authority. This exercise was an abysmal failure. The damage to our system of jurisprudence was so great and the cost so high that the people repealed the prohibition in just 14 years. Once again, the government tried to place obstacles in the path of the market and failed. The so called "War on Poverty" was begun in the 1960s by President Johnson. By some estimates, this war has cost 7–10 trillion dollars. Just using the low end of this estimate, the federal government could write a check to every man, woman, and child in the country for $23,333.34. Yet, we still have poor people in our midst. Why? Were our intentions not honorable? Didn't we mean well? Regardless of our intentions, this war is also a failure in every respect. LBJ is currently enjoying his just reward and we are still paying the bill for his folly. Today we find ourselves engaged in a "War on Drugs." Like Prohibition, this war has been very costly in blood, treasure, and liberties. Even those of us who do not use illicit drugs have been forced to surrender our liberties in an effort to fight this so-called war. This war is also un-winnable because there is a market for narcotic and hallucinogenic drugs. I am not arguing that it is wise to use drugs . . . just that this war is far too expensive in too many ways and it is also a total failure. What do these three examples have to do with illegal immigration? They are just examples of what we might expect to get if we demand that government do something about this or any other problem. Do we think for a moment that the new war on illegal immigration will be any more successful than any of these previous programs? The market will overcome any obstacle government can place in its path. As long as there is a market for anything, the demand will be met. Let's look at some more of government's attempts to interfere with market demand. Jail — the most secure facility that government can construct — still leaks. Contraband products still make their way inside of the walls of every jail. Why? Because there is a market for these forbidden products. If government cannot stop the flow of contraband into a jail, how on earth do you think it will ever stop a porous border with Mexico? Sure, we could spend billions of dollars in the effort but it would enjoy the same level of success as the other failed attempts. Various talking heads have suggested the problem could be fixed easily . . . with the stroke of a pen. They are convinced that all we have to do is put an armed guard every four feet along the southern border and this will stop the flow. It will do no such thing. As we have seen, the market will simply devise ways to get around any obstacle that government can create. Others have suggested throwing the employers in jail. This approach is particularly egregious. This employer may have done something illegal when he hired an illegal alien . . . but what has he done wrong? He has hurt no one. He has helped a person climb up out of poverty. He has done so without the aid of his fellow citizens and the immigrant has improved himself because of this one employer and his actions to meet a market demand. To deprive an entrepreneur of his liberty for doing nothing immoral is repugnant to me as a citizen. Besides, we would then be without whatever this person was producing. We would have to pay for his incarceration and possibly add the members of his family to the welfare rolls. This would be terribly expensive and the potential for abuse is enormous. What if I had a competitor that I knew was using illegal immigrants? Couldn't I turn him in to the authorities to eliminate the competition? That way I could jack my prices up without improving the product at all. The consumer would be forced to buy my higher-priced product. Does this really sound like a good idea? Let's look at government as we would look at any other supplier of services. If they don't do a good job, quit using them and go on to someone who is better equipped and has more incentive to get the job done right. If you took a broken chair to a wood shop to be repaired and it fell apart the first time you sat in it, would you go back to this same shop and insist the proprietor take more money from you to do the job right the next time? I doubt it. Yet this is exactly how we respond to government failure. When the schools do not educate we give them more money. If we continue to clamor for tougher enforcement of immigration laws, the politicians in Washington who always have a damp finger in the air to see which way the sheep would like to be led will certainly spend billions of your dollars in an attempt to do just that. When government fails, as it surely will, the politicians who pushed for this program will be enjoying a very lucrative retirement (at your expense) and a new crop of liars and thieves will be sitting on their perch at the helm of government arguing for more money, for better tools and training, more manpower, etc. But rest assured, this program will enjoy the same level of success as any previously mentioned attempt to thwart the market. If we truly want to solve the illegal immigration problem, we would do well to curb and abolish the regime-based reasons that immigration has become such a contentious issue."

Hmmm..not demanding the gov't to stop illegal immigration, because it will grow the power and scope of gov't control. I might have to re-think this.

[Edited on May 13, 2006 at 2:13 AM. Reason : hmm]

5/13/2006 2:12:30 AM

DEY TOOK ERR JOBSS!!!

5/13/2006 3:30:42 AM

Before you moved to Miami, you should of relized you had to know Spanish.....even all the way down to McDonalds they have to know Spanish.

5/13/2006 6:22:41 PM

sorry to disappoint all you haters, but English is *not* the official language here.

5/13/2006 6:37:19 PM

negras, jews, and all different kinds of chinks stink and i hate em

5/13/2006 7:31:32 PM

^^don't get into "semantics"

[Edited on May 14, 2006 at 2:21 AM. Reason : you're retarded]

5/14/2006 2:18:28 AM

Is there an example of a multicultural society that has lasted for a substantial period of time?

5/14/2006 2:37:41 AM

Rome

5/14/2006 2:50:06 AM

the way i see it we are already 50% ignorant conservative christian bible fucks so i don't see how it could get worse

5/14/2006 1:52:29 PM

Well, it could become 50% ignorant kleptocratic communist fucks (you know, rule by democrats).

5/14/2006 3:19:57 PM

start making babies or the mexicans will enslave the white people

5/14/2006 3:28:05 PM

communist?...

i wasn't meaning "conservative christian" to mean republican, i meant conservative as in they don't believe in anything that doesn't adhere to their religious beliefs

[Edited on May 14, 2006 at 4:00 PM. Reason : ignorance is bliss, but is a fucking pain in the ass for everyone else]

5/14/2006 3:54:49 PM

the obvious solution is to move back to europe and preserve your white heritage

5/14/2006 4:37:08 PM

^^ I wasn't necessarily saying that I wrote the opposite of what you did, I was merely saying what would be much worse.

5/14/2006 5:01:26 PM

Quote :

"Is there an example of a multicultural society that has lasted for a substantial period of time?"

Almost by definition, any empire will be multicultural. The Roman and Ottoman Empries both encompassed several very different cultures with a large degree of success for a long time.

5/14/2006 10:15:34 PM

Quote :

"Is there an example of a multicultural society that has lasted for a substantial period of time?"

take a fucking cultural anthropology course please......this statement doesnt make any sense

5/14/2006 10:23:06 PM

and I am going to take a class because some asshat on a message board says so

I would clear up my comment, but I have lost interest in this topic and am going to bed

5/14/2006 10:52:37 PM

^then youll remain ignorant. i feel sorry for you.

[Edited on May 14, 2006 at 11:38 PM. Reason : 5 ]

5/14/2006 11:37:44 PM

I think I am being misunderstood. History is full of examples of countries who eventually become seperated on ethnic, racial or religious lines. Germany and the Jews, Hutu vs. Tutsi, Croat vs. Serb, South African apartheid, Protestant vs. Catholic, Sunni vs. Shiite; anti immigrant backlash in the US and Europe, ect. Those are just some recent examples of what has been going on for thousands of years.

It is difficult, of not impossible to find a country where true equality exists between all people with adiverse ethnic and racial makeup. I know that it doesn't exist in the United States today.

[Edited on May 15, 2006 at 7:33 AM. Reason : .]

5/15/2006 7:23:45 AM

^ You're right...

...equality doesn't even exist in Asia, where everyone pretty much looks the same

5/15/2006 10:18:29 AM

^^ Is true equality even a good thing?

Besides, your statements seem to assume that "true equality" has existed among purely homogeneous societies. I would propose to you that "true equality" has never exited under any circumstances, regardless of ethnic/racial makeup. Therefore, lamenting that such impossiblities have not existed in multi-cultural societies is neither here nor there.

I would propose to you that human beings are imperfect and no society will ever achieve perfection, however you define it. As such, I would submit that as far as human society has ever come America favors very well. We may not all be equal before the law, but we are doing our level headed best, something Rome or the Ottoman Empire could not claim.

5/15/2006 10:29:56 AM

i wouldnt compare the USA to the Roman or Ottoman empire. The conditions are totally different and the fact the USA has only been a total world power for an extremely short time period makes the comparison kind of silly when the Romans had total power of their "known world" for centuries.

5/15/2006 10:36:14 AM

The Romans also used to take slaves and throw them into lions dens and slay each other for entertainment.They also crucified dissenters. It wasnt that enlightened of a society.


[Edited on May 15, 2006 at 11:20 AM. Reason : .]

5/15/2006 10:51:17 AM

buttsex with boys

5/15/2006 11:01:04 AM