How interesting that Jimmy Carter’s strong statement that unregenerate southern racism is fueling the "animosity" to Barack Obama was the top story on NBC Nightly News and Hardball. Suddenly there was Carter the prophet again, offering a moral judgment about our politics. Controversial. And I agree.
Remember when Jimmy Carter offered moral pronouncements about the issue that he thinks is the most important problem in our foreign policy, so important that he has written two books about it in the last few years, including Palestine Peace Not Apartheid? Controversial, yes. And Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi condemned him and he was banned from a speaking role at the Democratic convention, and Terry Gross and Wolf Blitzer treated him like a nutter, and no one put him on the national news. That’s about the power of the Israel lobby in our public life.
Carter rips the quasi-fascist Israeli Jews as racist…outrage from the American left-liberal establishment.
Carter rips average American whites as racist…cheers from the American left-liberal establishment.
What’s wrong with this picture?
CM:
“What’s wrong with this picture?”
FPM:
The answer to that question lies at the root of what’s wrong with America.
You know it, and I know it, and the number of people coming to the realization
is growing by the day. Therefore, the manipulators will continue to promote racial disharmony as they continue their machinations in support of the rogue state. If too many people wake up to the fact, it could be bad news for the usual suspects.
FPM
I don’t think anyone should be surprised. I have lived many years in Europe and Mexico and have found that racism is a common factor in human beings. It is one of those default reactions that we probably all have to deal with. Fear of the other is something we need to rise above. As a white American man I am seldom subjected to overt racism except maybe in the afro-american neighborhoods. I once had a black girlfriend and was assailed over this by black men. I am currently living in Mexico and hear stories by my Mexican friends who tell me of ugly incidents with strangers.
Phillip I was thinking the very same thing when I saw Carter. Not a whisper during the interview about the UN report. Even those liberal talking heads like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann have not touched it. You think their producers say no no no.
I thought both Keith and Rachel have said they are somewhat in control on what is on their programs.
When I challenged Chris Matthews at the Libby trial (talked with him 5 minutes or so) I asked him why he never touches the I/P conflict (all ready knew the answer) Just wanted to hear what he would say. His response “I do not control the programming at MSNBC. At the time Tim Russert did…I believe
what is up with Keith and Rachel…too chicken shit to toucht it of forbidden.
They have to tell us for the hundredth time about what Joe Wilson said during Obama’s health care speech. ay yi yi
Beautiful Kathleen. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
What up with Rachel Maddow became plainly obvious when she ridiculed America’s offer to pay $900M to repair the damage of Operation Cast Lead. Rachel wondered how th US come up up with millions to pay Hamas when it had a financial crisis at home.
The obvious answer would have been and should have been to take it out the funds earmarked for Israel. But like the progressive Maura Liasson and Terry Gross, both Maddow and Olberman are true blue and white Zionists.
Well. Keith Olbermann I perceive as one of those American Jews who is walking a tightrope between what he believes is right and pressure from his family and his community. Or at least, that’s what I read into it. He didn’t outright condemn the attack on Gaza — for which I am disappointed — but he did report on it in fairly stark, unequivocal terms (before letting it drop off the map, granted).
Rachel Maddow, for as much as I admire her, is hawkish in her own way. For whatever reason she’s bought into the whole “Islam is a threat to the United States” line, though I think in her case it’s out of genuine patriotism and (dare I say) ignorance. I have some hope that maybe she’ll come around eventually but for now, yeah, her stance on Israel-Palestine, such as it is, is reprehensible.
I wouldn’t characterize either as Zionists, but they are complicit in Zionism after a fashion by being so permissive and failing to confront those particular distortions. It’s disappointing because they’re perfectly willing to confront other types of distortion, but I still hold out hope. In no uncertain terms is the American Left pulling towards anti-occupation — whether that’s our occupations or Israel’s — and sooner or later Keith and Rachel will have to take a definitive stand, one way or another.
chaos 1700
while I admire Rachel’s intellect she has seem to have bought out to the bad Muslims script. Bad Iran script. She even repeats the debunked lie that the Iranian President said “wipe Israel off the map” Professor Juan Cole cleared up the purposely mistranslated and endlessly repeated statement. Why Rachel continues to repeat this along with never challenging anyone who says Iran has or is developing an alleged nuclear weapons program.
Where are the challenging questions “where is the hard evidence”
The former and present head of the Iaea have both said there is “no hard evidence”
For Keith and Rachel to ignore this UN report is oh so telling.
I guess they need to keep repeating the Joe “you lie” Wilson line.
I’m telling you guys, all of this can be traced to left-wing party-line group think. The right-wing hyper partisans do the same thing.
It’s clearly in the Democratic Party’s best long-term interests to retain their wealthy Zionist Jews. Criticizing Israel will lose them a lot of their wealthy Zionist Jews. So the Palestinians get sacrificed to the Party interests.
This is also how the Communists rationalized their atrocities: “It’s in the interests of the people,” they claimed. “You’ve got to break eggs to make an omelet.”
Party-line group think is a slippery slope, and becomes a kind of mental disorder wherein the individual abandons his or her personal intellect to Party policy, and then comes up with ways to rationalize the marching orders.
The rage that lies just below the surface of both Maddow and Olbermann and their cynical and endless streams of bitter, sarcastic rhetoric makes me wonder if both weren’t Soviet apparatchiks attached to the propaganda bureau in a previous life.
I have noticed too that Keith and Rachael on MSNB are relentless in critical analysis of so much, but when it comes to the USA foreign policy with Israel right or wrong they are joined at the hip by Fox channel and talk radio’s Medved and Limbaugh and
Savage and Beck et al. Same with Maher et al. It’s disgusting. I think from the goy side of this
united pubic TV News front it’s more a case of which side their bread is buttered on; with the jewish side, it’s a case of buying into what Witty calls jewish continuity uber alles and at any price to the larger masses. In short, all our hypocrites, but the key
goy pundits I mentioned are more selfish in that they are thinking of their careers, while the jew pundits are simply ethnocentric when it comes to Israel.
Terri Gross is part of the team who repeats the unsubstantiated claims about Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program. I have heard her do it so many times I have lost count. she also continually repeated and debunked ‘wipe Israel off the map” statement that the Iranian President is claimed to have said. Juan Cole debunked that statement several years ago.
So Terri not only does not challenge anyone who repeats these claims she repeats them herself.
Jimmy Carter has taken a beating but he never goes down. His faith and his belief in a fair and just peace in the middle east keeps him a float and gains a great deal of admiration from many of us.
wonder if Brian Williams, Rachel, Keith, Katthews. Blitzer or any of the other liberal leaning folks will ever touch the UN Report. Will not be holding my breath
hell if it were not for your site as well as Amy Goodman the so called progressive blogosphere might be a bit void about this issue
Did any of those TV pundits ever touch the 9/11 commission’s white wash of
the key motive for the attacks they discovered from the actual perps’ mouths? No. Did they even once bring up the 5 dancing Israelis or N’s slip of the tongue when he said 9/11 was a good thing for Israel? No. What we need on TV news honchos
is just one homy and relatively independent and grass roots Beck type who actually is fully informed before he goes on the air.
I remember when Carter first appeared on the national political scene — his Southern Baptist pieties drove me up the wall. How wrong I was. It is rare for such a good man to rise to such high station in American politics. He along with John Q Adams are the two greatest American ex-presidents. Meaning by this their accomplishments after they left office.
As president he served Israel’s interests better than any other US president. Basically the peace treaty with Egypt was probably the best thing that happened to Israel after the Nakba. It has always puzzled me that the lobby turned on him after that.
BTW Chris, left-liberals were not outraged at Carter for pointing out that Israel had become an apartheid state. Where do you come up with this nonsense? We welcomed his book. It was the neocons and other rightwing zionist forces in this country that expressed outrage. The worse that could be said is that many did not come to his defense, but that is not the same as expressing outrage.
You’re denying Carter was blacklisted by the left-liberal Dem establishment as a result of his book criticizing Zionism? C’mon. As a regular reader of this site, you know exactly what goes on. Here are a couple of links from around these parts to remind you
–
“The Jewish press has covered the fact that Jimmy Carter was ostracized at the Democratic Convention. The Forward says that the Obama camp made the call so as not to alienate Jewish voters.
link to mondoweiss.net
“As Klein points out, Walt was smeared widely and on the front pages of respectable publications as an antisemite. This is also a prohibition that stops people, and for good reason. Jimmy Carter was called the same word and shunned at the Democratic convention because of his position.”
link to mondoweiss.net
“On MSNBC, Mitchell and Rachel Maddow are making hay of the fact that McCain didn’t choose Joe Lieberman, and so the Republican convention is turning itself into Houston ’92 all over again…But why are they completely unable to talk about the exile of Jimmy Carter at the Democratic convention…out of fear that the Dems would alienate the Jewish vote/Jewish donors?”
link to mondoweiss.net
–
Jewish Zionists own the upper echelons of the Democratic Party to the extent that it kicks their own ex-president in the balls and throws him under the bus when he dares to question Zionism. But the liberal and Zionist MSM treat him like a returning hero when he starts trashing American whites.
Can anyone say: “Democratic Party Jewish supremacism”?
No question that the liberals kicked Carter to the curb when he turned his light on Israel’s actions concerning the Palestinians. He bought peace for Israel with Egypt
and Jordan (at USA taxpayer expense, continuing now), but now he’s no longer worthy.
Maybe a semantic difference, but I do not believe in the existence of a ‘liberal left establishment’. There are establishment figures that appeal to progressive and left voters, but the policies they have pushed over the last few decades are not from the left. Things like imperial wars, nafta and other globalization efforts , deregulation of finance and the current insolvent bank bailout not to mention support for the Israeli colonial effort. These were all promoted by the Democratic Party establishment. There is nothing from the left here.
There is nothing liberal about the Democratic Party, and their disgraceful treatment of Carter only proves it.
syvanen,
The sooner you internalize the fact that you have wasted a lot of effort and well-intentioned political activism for a party that bows and scrapes for Jewish donations as much or more than the Republicans, the sooner you can take a more realistic look at the scene as a whole. I laugh when I see quotes like the one in Chris’ post that puts “Jewish voters” before “Jewish donations”. What a crock!!!
“It was the neocons and other rightwing zionist forces in this country that expressed outrage. ”
The fact of the matter is that the entire PEP left liberal crowd ARE rabid rightwing Zionists when it comes down to the topic of Israel, no matter how they pretend to be different. Get the log out of your eye, man. The left-liberals shunned Carter like a red haired stepchild at a Chinese family picnic!!!!
FPM
Yes, and remember that organized jewry pays for half of all federal democratic campaign election costs though jews are 2% of the USA population.
Even Amy Goodman has only recently begun to touch this issue. She avoided it for a long time.
Blitzer, incidentally, is a former AIPAC’er. I can’t find the link now, but someone did an excellent job of illustrating how Blitzer has spent the last few years, as an anchor and political debate moderator, subtly shutting down debate on Israel.
During Carter’s administration he was considered too far to the right for American progressives to endorse.
He does a great deal of good work, and makes some statements that are unrealistic and combatative.
He’s a free man, no longer constrained by future concerns of political and other relationships. But, he is, as his center still requires funding. He is still a “political man”.
Not a prophet. I’m still confused by whether Phil thinks that Carter advocated for a single-state solution, or just noted that the continuing settlement expansion added obstacles to it.
Nothing to learn here. Same old stuff. Carter was great when he orchestrated
peace for Israel with Egypt (by buying off Egypt with US taxpayer funds), and now he’s an asshole because he wants us to look
at the Palestinians’ suffering and indirectly asks us to ask ourselves, what did the Palestinians have to do with the Shoah? Carter sins in that he does not simply
rubber-stamp Israeli activity. Period.
Chelsea Clinton is engaged to Marc Mezvinsky, whose uncle is Norton Mezvinsky, who co-wrote ‘Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel’ with Israel Shahak.
The old Irish trailer park redneck Prez is still trying to get into the Establishment via his daughter. Nothing illustrates better who rules the USA.
This book is called anti-Zionist by Camera. Also according to Wikipedia, Israel Shahak was lauded by the late great Edward Said and promoted by Robert Fisk and Vidal. In short Mr Norton Mezvinsky is a brave man who dares to tell truth to power. I don’t think Abe Foxman will be thrilled by any connection to the Clintons. I thank mr Ed_Frias for bringing Israel Shahak to my attention.
I find it interesting that both President Ford and Walter Cronkite said President Carter was definitely the smartest president each of them ever met, and that Jimmy Carter was one of the smartest men each of them ever knew.
When Cronkite was asked the question about the smartest president, and he had replied, he added, “without a doubt.”
Actually, it was more emphatic than that. The interviewer said “Really?” when Cronkite cited Carter. Cronkite said, “Oh! Without a doubt! Without a doubt!”
They showed this clip as part of the memorial to Cronkite.
Carter is still hanging in there, and outside of politics, look at his contribution to habitat for humanity….He’s a superior Christian–I say that being an agnostic.
I think Carter is just playing the good white Southerner on this one. What does he really know about what is going through the minds of people who oppose Obama? There probably are some people who don’t want a black president. So what? Obama’s ACORN and religious associations and comments about small town whites were noticed, whether he was called out or not.
I agree with Todd. While previous Democratic presidents have at least paid lip-service to some of the concerns of middle-America, the Obama administration has been quite overt in their contempt for small town whites.
As Todd said, this contempt *has* been noticed, and it has fueled a great deal of resentment on the right. I’m sure Obama’s race amplifies the resentment for many people, but most of all I think Obama’s attackers are angry that their concerns (such as the behind-the-scenes bank bailouts and dissembling on the issue of health coverage for illegal immigrants) are being laughed at.
DavidF – The Census Bureau annual survey was released last week. In 2008, the poverty rate rose to 13.2 percent (the highest in 11 years), while median household inicome fell to $50,303. Ten years earlier, adjusted for inflation, it was $51,295.
Bush’s tax cuts were worth $1.3 billion; the benefits were felt most by the top 1 percent of earners, while increases in special assessments, fees and sales taxes transferred an even greater proportion of the burden of taxation to those in lower economic classes.
During the Bush administration, deregulation of industry and finance benefited corporate commerce while further marginalizing the small business owner, as well as increasing the cost of living for us all. The wars which have poured trillions of dollars into the pockets of special interests were a keynote of the Bush administration. Health care costs have risen steadily over the last several decades, as the numbers of those insured have dropped, just as steadily. The bailouts started under Bush and were in progress as Obama began his administration.
I don’t recall any well-organized campaigns by “small town whites” calling on President Bush or Republican party holders to change policies which were causing problems for a great many people long before Obama took office – and it really does seem that the majority were too well cushioned to feel any concern until finally betrayed by the failures of those policies.
Now, suddenly, there is concern about “behind-the-scenes bank bailouts.”
Please provide examples to support your assertions of “overt…contempt for small town whites”, and “dissembling on the issue of health coverage for illegal immigrants”.
Todd, after the GOP’s orchestrated efforts to deny the vote to large sections of rural America through various stratagems, it isn’t any surprise that there would be a counterattack against efforts to expand voter registration – and given the size of the nation, it’s not a surprise, either, when irregularities crop up in a particular group’s activities. However, I am curious at your linking of Obama with ACORN, and also about comments regarding his religious associations. Could you give links to illustrate what exactly you mean, and also what comments about small town whites you consider particularly notable? Thanks.
Margaret, I’m not sure why average whites haven’t turned vicious towards the Republicans, or what you mean when you state that the GOP has tried to disenfranchise large sections of rural America.
If I’m not mistaken, Obama did some legal work for ACORN when he was a community activist, and Jeremiah Wright is a pretty polarizing figure. Also, dismissing the valid concerns of the vast majority of whites about immigration, outsourcing, affirmative action, etc. as clinging to guns, bigotry and religion isn’t going to make many friends for Obama. Throw in Robert Reich specifically excluding whites from stimulus jobs on behalf of the Obama administration, and it’s clear that Obama isn’t post-racial.
Jimmy Carter is just being sanctimonious and politically correct.
Todd, I’m not dismissing valid concerns. I am questioning tactics and strategies which are used to manipulate public resentment, redirecting it for political gain, in a situation where actions are needed to reverse and change policies that bring about the circumstances underlying the resentment.
I saw those policies being put into practice, witnessed the adverse consequences from the changes they brought about – while others were too preoccupied to notice, being busy cheering the war against Afghanistan and Iraq, playing the market and buying investment property and S.U.V’s with the profits.
Jeremiah Wright is no more a polarizing figure than many others; however, great attention has been focused on him. What is significant about the fact that Obama did legal work for ACORN?
As I asked DavidF, please provide quotations of what you refer to as “dismissing the valid concerns” of others. Also, I think stating that those concerns are of “a vast majority of whites” requires substantiation.
Please provide more information regarding your interesting statement that Robert Reich is excluding whites from stimulus jobs
What does post-racial mean?
Margaret, I agree with your remarks about Bush. Both parties have adopted policies hostile to middle-America (they are unified on free-trade, for example, and both Bush and McCain were pro-immigration). The Republicans have been better at giving lip-service to heartland concerns.
The voting blocs we’re discussing would not have seen tax-cuts as objectionable since the generally think of “tax cuts” as simply letting people keep their earned money. The bailouts was a giveaway of *their* money to those responsible for their economic suffering–a big difference.
To Todd’s remarks I’ll add that the Obama administration blew off the tea party and town hall demonstrations as formented by an irrelevant malcontents and Fox News. The dominant media has repeatedly dismissed the protesters as racists, and the Times mocked them as a dying demographic that could be ignored.
Nothing in the health care proposals prevented illegal immigrants from receiving care, although Obama claimed otherwise before his health care address.
Margaret, here’s an article by Stanley Kurtz on Obama, ACORN, and the subprime mortgage collapse. Obama did much more for ACORN than merely act as a lawyer.
link to article.nationalreview.com
It seems we are being trolled from a new angle. David F is using the National Review as an unbiased source. It’s like taking words out of Glen Beck’s mouth. I only recall Obama’s unfortunate remark about guns and bibles in small town America during the Pennsylvania primary.
jimby – One would expect that “overt contempt” would require a pattern of behavior, yes? But propaganda isn’t fact based, it uses incidents, from which various connotations and implications are twisted.
DavidF, if you haven’t done so, I would suggest you research securitization of assets before concluding that Mr. Kurtz is an authority to be trusted on the subject of “the financial meltdown”, or sub-prime mortgages. If you have done so, then let’s agree to disagree.
Todd, it wasn’t a statement, it was a question. Your perception is that your views are those of an average American. At one time, my thought was that a great many Americans shared my views; looking at comments on weblogs, I conclude still that a great many do share some of my views. No one seems to share most of them.
There are many, many people in the US, and the US is a huge territorial area. It seems likely to me that there is no ‘average American’ point of view – not even one wherein the average is of views regarding the same range of topics, if of differing opinions. Americans seem to differ considerably in their views depending on a great many factors. If you disagree, it would further discussion if you provided some basis to support your disagreement.
My question ignored “real concerns’? Please, advise me what those concerns are in more detail, because they aren’t obvious from DavidF’s statement that “Nothinig in the health care proposals prevented illegal immigrants from receiving care.” Do you believe that someone who does not have legal residency status should be prohibited from receiving medical care? If so, why?
Your statement is “Few Americans have wanted the illegal or legal immigration that has taken place over the last 40+ years, and few have benefited.” The majority of legal immigrants enter the country through immigration statutes that privilege the relatives of current US citizens; another large number have been admitted because of their association with the US militarysuring wars in other nations. Those without such relatives or such a connection must await random selection from a pool of applicants, unless they fit into other categories which relate to specific statutes of law – such as being a refugee, or a holder of specific skill sets. Information regarding the categories are available on-line, as are statistics regarding the number of slots available, the number admitted per year, etc.
In referrnig to people as illegal, you are reducing them to one characteristic: their residency status. That’s a bit like considering police officers or physicians or airline pilots as robots that shut off when they aren’t in uniform, but a lot of people do think that way. To think differently is not to ignore someone else’s concerns, but rather to have a different opinion. Voicing my own opinion is not an act of ignoring yours – that our opinions differ doesn’t require that one of us change our mind, to agree with the other.
I am willing to read your explanation of why you don’t “want” immigrants, and why you feel that there is a lack of benefit from immigration, and to review links if you wish to provide them.
Those religions with which I am familiar all have elements that I consider polarizing. I”ll go review Reverend Wrights 60 minutes interview. I am curious – is he as extreme as the Reverend Rick Warren, who seems to believe that the secular are genetically defective? Does he go as far as Reverend Hagee, who urges the elimination of people of other faiths? Or would he be satisfied if others just convert to his religion and political beliefs, as Ann Coulter encourages us all to do?
No, I haven’t seen the clips of Robert Reich. Got a link?
DavidF – You wish to prevent people from receiving medical care if they have not completed the procedures for obtaining legal residency status in the U.S.?
That statement alone is ignoring the real concerns of average Americans. Few Americans have wanted the illegal or legal immigration that has taken place over the last 40+ years, and few have benefitted.
Would you say that ties to Jeremiah Wright are less polarizing than ties to Bob Jones University? Wright’s 60 Minutes interview alone made it clear that his church is Afro-Centric, which most whites should find polarizing.
Have your really not seen the clips of Robert Reich stating that white construction workers should be left out of the stimulus jobs? I saw it on C-Span. I didn’t make it up, and I surely understood what Reich meant.
Todd:”Few Americans have wanted the illegal or legal immigration that has taken place over the last 40+ years, and few have benefited.”
This is flat wrong. American agribusiness needs very cheap labor. I have work on corporate farms being the only anglo in the working pool. In California the farm lobby gets all kinds of special treatment. 20 years ago when I was there driving a tractor I got 6 dollars and hour and time and a half after 60 hrs. Irrigators got no overtime. They often worked 120 hrs a week for 5 dollars an hour and no benefits. This is how your food if so cheap at the supermarket.
You are certainly right about agribusiness benefiting from mass immigration. If it could not get new throwaway workers so easily, it would have to offer higher wages.
And if our food weren’t so cheap, maybe we (Americans) wouldn’t be so fat!
(As for support for immigration–in past years Americans have been favorable to legal immigration, but not illegal immigration. In this economic crisis though, popular opinion seems to be shifting towards restriction.)
Margaret,
There is absolutely no moral argument whatsoever to be made on behalf of socialism. The massive deficits, and debt, and projected unfunded entitlements have grown so huge, the federal government is simply printing money and selling future generations into hawk to keep the bottom from falling out.
The only reason the dollar hasn’t completely collapsed is because the US military is the most powerful in the world, and goes around sticking guns in people’s faces to keep it propped up.
We used to have a gold-backed dollar. Now we have a gun-backed dollar. The plutocratic socialist elite (left and right) put us in this position, and are now in the process of digging us even deeper. They don’t care. Maddow and Olbermann and their liberal intelligentsia ilk are paid well to spew their elitist party-line propaganda and find ways to pit the people against one another to distract them from what’s really going on.
I agree about socialism, but I’m not sure that China is backing the dollar out of fear of U.S. guns. I think it is correct to say that most U.S. citizens pay taxes out of fear of the government, and would be sick, if they aren’t already, to know how their money is used.
I think China is propping up the dollar in order that we will continue to perpetuate the strength of its economy and development by buying its goods, meanwhile it is also diversifying into gold and into other currencies and investments in other countries, while it continues to sell us the rope to hang ourselves.
This will all end when other countries stop propping up the dollar, or China gains the confidence and comfort level to deliberately kicks one of the legs out from under our economic stool for its own “great power” purposes, at which point we will have to go to war to defend the petrodollar and the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, or let inflation completely consume the dollar.
Either way, we’re in a hole dug by the corrupt two-party elites that nearly everyone in Congress except Ron Paul is hell bent on digging deeper.
Chris – How do you define ‘socialism’? Corporate socialism, as it seems we’ve had for quite some time, where the government offsets the cost of business for the privilege of having businesses exist, doesn’t seem to have worked very well.
(Hope I got the right reply button this time!)
Jimby,
I seriously doubt that very many Americans would have ever agreed to a change in the demographics and culture of the nation, whether it is through legal or illegal immigration. That was one of the main objections to the ’64 legislation. Illegal immigration has always been disliked because it is illegal, but the demographic effects of legal immigration are now clearly seen, and the developing backlash isn’t just due to the economic climate.
As far as food goes, I understand how it gets to my table. I just disagree that most Americans benefit from corporate farming. I’d even go as far as saying that corporate farming has been a disaster for most Americans.
Todd, I agree that complaints about immigration seem perennial. What do you consider the demographic effects of legal immigration to be, other than the backlash to which you refer?
The larger an institution gets, the fewer benefits seem to result for the majority affected by whatever the corporation is involved with.
Where do you live, Margaret? Do you not see the demographic changes where you live? Do you believe that there isn’t a deliberate push to change the demographics of the nation? Do you believe that any person can go to any place on the planet and fit in without difficulty or negative effects? Do you believe that the vast majority of the legal immigrants who have been allowed to come to the nation were beneficial to most Americans?
I live in a region where the immigration of Americans to already well-established if spread out communities of several different nations, including the indigent population, gained momentum in the mid-1800′s. The cultural life of my community is very diverse. I enjoy interacting within that diversity and do feel I’ve benefited from it.
Several branches of my extended family undoubtedly would have died out because of widespread famine in their homeland if not allowed to emigrate to the US. Likewise, other branches would have perished from war or political or religious persecution, depending on which century one considers. Are you of indigenous American origin? If not, when did your ancestors come to the US and why would you think they shouldn’t have been allowed to do so?
I am not aware of any reason to believe there is a deliberate push to change the demographics of the nation. I think that those people able to go to regions with a different culture and establish a stable situation are among the most capable of people. That perception is based on experience with such people in social and working life.
You are right about corp farming being a disaster for America. Where I worked in the Central Valley of California, the water table dropped 5 feet a year. When the farmers get done with the land it will be like a used kleenex.
Chris, do you think that China will ever be in a position to ditch the U.S.? I have no faith in the U.S. long-term, but I also wonder if the Chinese hand is as strong as many claim it is.
I think China is playing the long game, and is ready to step in when the economics of Washington’s epic swindles inevitably blow up in America’s face.