Comments on: The Right Goes Nativist

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Fri, 19 May 2006 22:05:17 +0000

Imagine if I made a statement like, “Drought in the heartlands causes increased bread theft.” Would that be a fair statement? No? Why not? Because the cause of the drought was in no way connected to the theft of bread.
If discussion of the immigration is bringing out all sorts of feelings in people, whose fault is that? The Immigrants’? No. The people involved in the discussion? No. It is the people involved in their own acts of prejudice, discrimination, vandalism, or whatever that are responsible for their own actions.
This morning I heard that an amendment to prevent illegal aliens from collecting Social Security for the period they worked here illegally, was defeated.
On the one hand, they did work here, and should be entitled to something. On the other hand, they could have been working for several years, using a card that belongs to someone else. Our already strained Social Security system, will be further strained by people who never should have been here, in the first place.
Whichever side you’re on, are “hate crimes” justified? No.
Violence? Discrimination? Vandalism? No, no, and no.
So, what’s the problem?
Shall we stop talking about it?

By: duros62

duros62 — Fri, 19 May 2006 19:05:46 +0000

Waiting in line behind illegals who by law MUST be seen would likely stir up resentment
Do they have to wear a sign or something? Or do you just know in your gut they are illegals because they’re brown and speaking a different langauge?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 18 May 2006 16:05:22 +0000

I’m happy that O’Reilly came out and said this, because I blogged about it a few days ago.

I think that it’s perfectly reasonable to assume that many on the left and far left believe that a “new America” made up of a huge influx of immigrants who have no ties to the “religious right” and who come from nations with a less-than-favorable view of capitalism and current American foreign policy would be far more receptive to the left’s economic and foreign policy goals. Think of it as an immigration-based solution to the so-called “Roe effect.”

I also think that it’s reasonable to assume that conservatives oppose a massive influx of new immigrants for precisely the same reasons.

A century ago, “patriotic” groups like the KKK fought to keep America from being “polluted” by Jewish and Catholic immigrants from Europe. But those immigrants gave birth to the generation of Americans who fought WWII, our “greatest generation.” Those immigrants made our country great.

My faith in America rests on the fact that we are a free society. As long as we are allowed to freely study our history and the ideals of our Founding Fathers, America will continue to be great, regardless of who settles here. I am only worried about the shadow of “evil white Christian male” historical revisionism that far-left academics continually cast over our culture.

(Of course I’m talking about the proposals to allow 100,000,000 new legal immigrants into the country over the next 20 years that are currently being debated by lawmakers. Illegal immigration is a completely different subject.)

I’d like to see the reasons behind increased legal immigration debated in public forums and by lawmakers. That debate would prove to be very interesting.

By: drpedro

drpedro — Thu, 18 May 2006 15:05:45 +0000

are people right to be angry that their families suffer because our government allows people to live here illegally?

I mean, progressives like you Paul excepted. You are too busy trying to figure a way to butt-snorkel yourself up the nether regions of a rich hollywood type to get invited to the “A” list openings, while at the same time maintain your “man of the people” demeanor.

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 18 May 2006 14:05:01 +0000

“I don t by any stretch of the imagination excuse bigotry. But resentment because our government won t enforce it s own laws seems pretty reasonable.”

I don’t excuse bigotry but I totally excuse the anger and fear that leads to it.

By: frameone

frameone — Thu, 18 May 2006 05:05:19 +0000

“I see illegals and THEY don t make me angry because I don t let other people control my emotions.”

Well put.

By: Leroy Brown

Leroy Brown — Thu, 18 May 2006 00:05:53 +0000

I thought Bill was saying around Christmas how white Chrisitans are the oppressed ones…

By: BD

BD — Thu, 18 May 2006 00:05:27 +0000

Hell, I’m surprised that O’Reilly was willing to admit that there was a white Christian power struggle. I could’ve sworn that was made up by the liberal MSM.

By: BD

BD — Thu, 18 May 2006 00:05:22 +0000

Structure, not struggle. Careful, the floor is slippery when Freudian.

By: drpedro

drpedro — Thu, 18 May 2006 00:05:11 +0000

no whale, I am not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater. But I always want to know whether the “data” is garbage or not.

don’t get me wrong, I don’t by any stretch of the imagination excuse bigotry. But resentment because our government won’t enforce it’s own laws seems pretty reasonable.

By: White Whale

White Whale — Wed, 17 May 2006 23:05:28 +0000

Yeah, because being okay with your life is not good enough? The plight of the white man is so ardous and taxing:) Pedro, that explanation is a lame excuse to hide ones own self-loathing. I see illegals and THEY don’t make me angry because I don’t let other people control my emotions. Hate groups are incapable of such control. I would sure hope that you would not instantly write off the SPLC because Oliver sited thier work. I mean they did fight against the Clan when it seemed hopeless. The Clan are a hate group, right Pedro?

By: drpedro

drpedro — Wed, 17 May 2006 23:05:27 +0000

would be interesting to see what the definition of a “hate group” is to the SPLC. Does it include the Minutemen?

On its face it makes sense though. It is called a backlash. Wouldn’t take many visits to the ER at most southwestern hospitals to make one angry. Waiting in line behind illegals who by law MUST be seen would likely stir up resentment. Knowing they were being seen for free would only make it worse…

By: duros62

duros62 — Wed, 17 May 2006 22:05:58 +0000

Never stopped him before.
Seriously, what does this asshat have to say on the air before Fox execs go “whoa, dude!”?

By: Hattie

Hattie — Wed, 17 May 2006 22:05:24 +0000

What is O’Reilly talking about? He makes no sense.