In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff

We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.

Try Advanced Search

  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...

Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette

Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Joanne Jacobs
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes

Redwood Dragon
The Invisible Hand
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz


Our Last 50 Referrers

« Another Helping of Raw Milk | Main | Vacation Working »

May 06, 2008

McCain on Hispanics

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

John McCain, setting out to appeal to a certain much-coveted voting bloc, says: "Everything about our Hispanic voters is tailor-made to the Republican message … I know their patriotism, I know the respect for the family, the advocacy for pro-life, I know the small business aspect of our Hispanic voters.”

Vdare's Marcus Epstein takes a look at the actual facts:

* Only 34% of Hispanics eligible for US citizenship choose to take the necessary steps to take it -- less than any other immigrant group. Of that group, only a third of Hispanics who are American citizens consider themselves Americans first.

* Respect for the Family: Half of Hispanic births in the US are out of wedlock.

* Pro Life: Hispanics are 2.7 times more likely to have an abortion than whites.

* Small Business: Hispanics make up 15% of the population and only 6.6 percent of all businesses.



posted by Michael at May 6, 2008


They're also far less likely to vote than whites. See Steve Sailer on that one.

Posted by: BIOH on May 6, 2008 5:42 PM


what a depressing election year. i'll be sitting this one out. wait... that what i always do, anyway.

Posted by: roissy on May 6, 2008 6:19 PM

There's no such thing as "Hispanics". They're not a homgeneous race, they don't have a shared culture and they can't certainly be taken as a whole with phony categories like "patriotic/unpatriotic", "pro-family/anti-family", etc. "Hispanic" is a stupid label invented in the U.S. for census purposes to describe immigrants who come predominantly from Mexico and a handful of other countries south of the border. Take a look at other countries like Chile or Argentina or, better yet, visit them, and you'll see the quality of living and the culture are nothing like what passport-less Americans consider to be "typically Hispanic".

Posted by: GB on May 6, 2008 10:56 PM

That's just his way of saying, hey, at least they're not as bad as that other minority.

Posted by: ziel on May 6, 2008 11:02 PM

Today I will be eating the best food in town, chili rellenos, served at a Mexican restaurant. It is run by a family of Californios, and involves the labor of the whole family. They are Evangelicals, and have a display of tracts. The family matriarch dresses the old fashioned way, with ankle-length skirts and a snood over her hair. She has a shy, sweet smile. The family knows its customers by name.

They were here in western North America first. I loved Santa Fe before it was homogenized, and marveled at the artistic and cultural achievements of its Hispanic and Indian populations, who were there and in California long before Anglos decided to steal those provinces of Mexico. Central to the life of those people was the Catholic Church, which instilled in them the values that run deep to this day.

I cherish these people, both in their modern and historic manifestations, and in their enduring culture the rest of America might find its salvation. They could teach Anglos a great deal about the sweetness of life and how to live it well.

Posted by: Richard S. Wheeler on May 7, 2008 8:51 AM

Richard, when was the last time you were in Brownsville, TX? I am just curious.

Anyway, for anyone who is getting depressed by the likely Presidential candidates and are thinking of not voting, let me pass on some advice my mother gave me many years ago:

If you want to vote but do not like any of the candidates, simply vote on the referendum items and do not vote for a candidate. "They" will know that you voted, but not for an actual candidate since you were completely unimpressed.

Posted by: Ian Lewis on May 7, 2008 9:52 AM

And I cherish the Aztec culture that was in Mexico before "we" came and overthrew it. They would cut the hearts out of victims with stone knives and then serve the hearts dressed with a delicious tomato sauce and stuffed with some lovely onions. Corazon rellenos, I guess you'd have called them. Mmmmm...

You know, if we really want all that great Mexican cuisine (and I do too, just not the really traditional stuff), we can always have a program to bring Mexican cooks into the country. I don't see why we need a quarter of the Mexican population up here just so Richard Wheeler can get his munchies munched.

Posted by: PatrickH on May 7, 2008 9:55 AM

Oh boy, here we go again with the "Anglos stole the land" business.

In actual point of fact, the United States paid Mexico $15,000,000 for the territory that was ceded in exchange for the cessation of hostilities during the Mexican-American War in 1848. (That's the equiavlent of $330,300,000 in today's dollars, probably a fair amount even today for unpopulated, unimproved land with no infrastructure.) If the terms were not to Mexico's liking, they had the option to keep fighting. I would also point out that through most of history, the winners of wars have very seldom compensated the losers in any meaningful way, so for the USA to pay Mexico was actually rather generous.

Now, as to America finding "salvation," one cannot use the example of one family to make the case that wholesale replacement of American culture with Mexican cultural norms will improve our country.

Posted by: c.o. jones on May 7, 2008 10:03 AM

I like McCain the man. I don't care for him much as a candidate.

I'm actually for Obama, but for ass-backward reasons. It doesn't matter very much who's president. I'm for Obama because his election would allow blacks to experience having power. They will discover that it isn't the magical solution to everything that they had hoped for. Things will go on much as before.

Obama finally renounced his loony pastor. That could send a good message through the black community. Obama is the first major elected black official to openly reject crazy Mau-Mauing.

If Obama is elected, we could be seeing the end of black Mau-Mauing. Begging and threatening whitey as a way of life might be considerably diminished.

On the other hand, Obama's election will be a boon to the quota-mongers. That doesn't affect me so much any more. I don't have a job that the quota candidates want. My job is technical. It demands real skills. The quota candidates love HR and "diversity" occupations. They want to be commissars of some policing ministry.

And, you've got to wonder: Would Obama really open up the jails and let black criminals out to terrorize black communities? He's said he would.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on May 7, 2008 10:04 AM

Thank you for making yourself clear. There is a leitmotif here that celebrates "us" (white people and European culture) against "them" (people of color and their cultures). The racial data-mining is the tip of the iceberg. There is a larger and darker mindset here; the utter absence of esteem and affection for others is evident, and amounts to xenophobia, and worse, a lack of charity or delight in other peoples. (I lived on the Mexican border for years and can speak from deep experience.) It's time for me to abandon this web log.

Posted by: Richard S. Wheeler on May 7, 2008 10:47 AM

Richard, that is absolute bullshit. I can not speak for everyone here, but I am willing to bet that most people that comment here regularly absolutely delight in our world's diversity. Hell, just look at how much white people LOVE to travel and experience other cultures.

Nor is it xenophobia. Personally, most of my family lives in Scotland. Scotland is now the WORST place to live in the industrialized western world. (This is according to some survey down about 2 years ago where Scotland basically ranked worst in every thinkable category except for Homicide).

But it wasn't always like that. When my mother grew up in Scotland in the 40's and 50's it had one of the lowest crime rates anywhere in the world. Now, many parts more closely resembe a demilitarized zone.

Now, does saying this make me a xenophobe, or a racist or a self-hating Scot?

Absolutely not!

It simply means that my eyes are open. And I think that it can be a great place once again.

But, back to America. To close our eyes to what is happening in places with the largest Hispanic immigrant populations is simply bowing down to Political Correctness for fear that someone will call us "xenophobes" or racists and say that we are bad people with dark mindsets.

If we are simply wrong, then, great. That is why open discussion is such a good thing. Why true debates with real open dialogue is so good.

Wrong people and wrong ideas are corrected. And Life advances.

Being wrong is not the same thing as being evil. Trying to prevent others from saying things that you simply do not like IS evil. It is part of this new, perverted religion call Political Correctness.

Posted by: Ian Lewis on May 7, 2008 11:40 AM


They wouldn’t have called them “Corazon rellenos” because they didn’t speak Spanish. Furthermore, the correct name would be “corazones rellenos”, “corazones” being plural for “corazón” (you also missed the “tilde” in the “o”). In any event, what does Aztec culture have to do with this discussion? Are you saying that modern-day Mexicans are cannibals too? Of course not, but that’s the type of far-fetched logic you’re using to try to make a point. BTW, nobody said it was Anglo-Americans that defeated the Aztecs. As for their barbarism, it’s not as if European history (or any other people’s) has been any less brutal. They also made great progress in math, architecture, astronomy, etc. but, again, this has nothing to do with:

a) stupid statistics about “Hispanics” as if they could be categorized as a homogeneous group while making sweeping statements about their habits even though there are more than 30 different countries in Latin America.
b) McCain’s pandering to get more votes.

And, last but not least:

c) constant whining about the evils of illegal immigration while doing absolutely nothing to prevent it other than blogging anonymously. And then you wonder why people don’t respect your country’s immigration laws?

Finally, was it really necessary for you and others to insult Richard S. Wheeler just because you didn’t agree with the point he made? Trying to be funny and falling flat on your face is no way to argue. It’s sad to see how individuals like you and others drive away far more interesting people like Mr. Wheeler.

Posted by: Gonzalo Baeza on May 7, 2008 1:45 PM


I must say in my defence that I said only that Richard Wheeler would call them that, not the Aztecs. But of course, my Spanish was wrong. Thanks for the correction. As for the tilde on the "o", I don't know the ASCII code for getting that down on screen. Can you help me? I don't seem to have a Spanish keyboard configured on my computer. They're somewhat rare up here in "my country". Pointers for that would be appreciated too.

As for my mentioning the Aztecs, I was responding to Richard Wheeler's bizarre invocation (not for the first time, I might add) of his favourite dish, the magical chile rellenos, as some kind of counterpoint to Michael's post about Hispanics and family values. Obviously, his anecdote had nothing to do with the point Michael was making. Neither, obviously, did mine. I was hoping, in vain I realize, that Richard would see that selecting one narrow experience of "Hispanics" doesn't answer the question of the desirability of large-scale Hispanic migration to the US. Not one little bit.

The problem with Richard's point is it's utterly blinkered self-centeredness. He shows no recognition of any of the externalities imposed on Americans, especially those less prosperous than he, by mass immigration from Mexico. It would behoove Mr. Wheeler to raise his snoot from his lovely tasty meal and realize that maybe, just maybe, there are some people out there not having quite as good time as he is, skimming his little dollop of Mexican culture (and not even from immigrant Mexicans, no less).

As for your, ah, points: a) well, I guess those statistics must be "stupid" if you say they are! Thanks for clearing that up!

And b) Yes, and...?

Finally c) I am not "blogging anonymously" about anything. I am commenting on a post on a weblog, just as you have. If you want to know my last name, it is there in my email address, should you care to look. I must admit I don't think you would be particularly happy if I did "more" about illegal immigration into America than commenting on a blog. My guess is that you don't want anything to be done about illegal immigration at all.

And finally, I am Canadian. My country has immigration policies that while flawed (and overly generous) are far better designed than America's self-annihilating prostration in the face of the Hispanic flood. My despair (and irritation) is aroused by Americans so selfish, so blinkered, so short-sighted, that they think their purring stomachs after a good meal constitute a guide to policies about anything, including immigration.

It is Richard Wheeler who should be ashamed of himself. What a selfish old coot he is!

Though he is an interesting one. I do hope he stays.

Posted by: PatrickH on May 7, 2008 5:39 PM

I say we treat the hispanic illegal aliens like the 30 different hispanic countries treat their illegal aliens. I'm sure Gonzalo could live with that.

As far as Wheeler goes, his completely illogical views on this topic are well-known. Living out in the middle of nowhere in an almost all-white town, he can afford to have an accomodating view. Its not like he'll ever have to live with the consequences of his politics, like the rest of the country does.

I just saw the other day another hospital closing down in Chicago due to the illegal alien influx of free-loaders. Its nice that Wheeler thinks another community should do without a hospital so he can eat burritos. I say he should learn to like the taste of pierogis instead.

Posted by: BIOH on May 7, 2008 5:47 PM

I apologize to Richard Wheeler for the two extra words I added to "selfish". They were uncalled for. Just those ones, though.

Posted by: PatrickH on May 7, 2008 6:01 PM

I hope Richard keeps visiting too.

Gonzalo -- Hungarian-Americans don't have tons in common with Irish-Americans, and Pakistani-Americans and Japanese-Americans are certainly two distinct breeds. Yet for the sake of convenience and categorization we refer to "White Americans" (or maybe "Americans of European descent") and "Asian-Americans." Whatever the case, it's no secret that what everyone -- including McCain -- is talking about in these discussions is Mexico and Mexicans, and our policies (formal and informal) vis a vis Mexican immigration.

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on May 7, 2008 6:43 PM

Patrick: Sorry, I assumed you were American. I made the wrong assumption just like you did by assuming I'm all for open borders. I guess that since I'm "Hispanic" I must be an advocate for amnesty in your eyes. Just for the record, I'm clearly not.

I wouldn't be bothered in the least if anyone among the legions of anti-immigration bloggers actually did something other than just blog. Actually, I wouldn't care either way. I just think it's funny to read all this whining and moaning while they people they want out of their country march on the streets, get organized, and increasingly exercise their political muscle on Election Day. In other words, they act far more intelligently than those who complain about their presence. Why is it that in Europe (with all of its restrictive speech laws and such) you see anti-immigration parties growing and in the U.S. all you see is bloggers?

You can use the language function in your PC so and switch back and forth between a Spanish and an English keyboard. It's not that tough and you don't need to be in any particular country to do it. There's your pointer.

I might have been a bit rude myself but I was really pissed by the way you addressed Mr. Wheeler's remarks. I don't think I've ever read a rude comment from him even when he's arguing. You can certainly dispute the points he made. I'm just bothered by the fact that your (and others')tone drove him away.

As for BIOH's remark about the 30 countries, immigration laws vary a lot among them, just like anything else (a fact that people who like talking about "Hispanic family values" or "Hispanic crime rates" clearly will never understand). Chile's immigration laws are pretty loose. Mexico's are pretty tough. That's just one example.

RE: Whites. My point is that Europeans don't refer to themselves as "Whites". They are Germans, French, etc. I understand the need to classify people into biological races for studies such as the ones conducted by Jensen, Herrnstein, et. al. There are enough genetic commonalities between Whites, Blacks, etc. for that to be perfectly legitimate from a scientific standpoint. What I think is stupid is to artificially create clusters of people as wildly diverse as Hispanics and then talk about their allegedly shared cultural values, propensities for certain behavior, etc.

I agree with Patrick's assessment about Canada's immigration policies. Then again, Canada has its own share of screwed up laws, particularly when it comes to free speech, Internet Big Brother monitoring and book burning. Don't be so harsh on Americans.

Posted by: Gonzalo on May 7, 2008 9:50 PM

I bet those "diverse" immigration laws don't allow 30 million illegal aliens to break said laws and cross the border. Nice try though.

These people are ruining the country. All the data says so. At least admit it, if not to us, to yourself.

Posted by: BIOH on May 7, 2008 10:39 PM

I object to the use of the label because it doesn't describe a race, or an ethnicity or even a homogeneous culture. Is that too difficult to understand? "These people" that are "ruining" the country can't do it all by themselves. They also need the help of anonymous bloggers that do nothing but complain, an inefficient government that doesn't enforce laws and would rather spend money invading other nations, and a long etcetera.

If we are talking about 30 different countries, it's very likely that their immigration laws will be different from each other. That's also a commonsensical observation, not a "nice try".

Posted by: Gonzalo on May 8, 2008 10:29 AM

Thanks for the pointer about the Spanish keyboard.

I guessed that you "wouldn't want anything done about illegal immigration", not that you would be in favour of amnesty.

"...while they people they want out of their country march on the streets, get organized, and increasingly exercise their political muscle on Election Day."

Well yes. That is exactly why I am at a loss to understand why Americans seem so blithely unconcerned about this. Whatever you think about the demographic and political transformation of a country, it is at least something that the citizens of that country should talk about, no?

Which brings me to the value of "whining and moaning" on blogs. This is simply part of a necessary discussion that America has not been having about immigration. You know what they say about squeaking wheels getting the oil.

I certainly hope (and believe, though less so with each passing year) that the "whining and moaning" will eventually wake America up before it finds itself irrevocably transformed into a third-world country. We already have too many of those. I myself would mourn the loss of America as she is today, and pace Richard Wheeler, would consider even the finest chile rellenos an inadequate substitute.

Posted by: PatrickH on May 8, 2008 11:28 AM

Hey Gonzalo, its time for hispanics like you to stop conflating immigration laws and policies and with lawbreakers who break all said laws. One activlity is legal, the other is illegal, got it? Is it too hard for you to understand?

You don't define how I use language. I do. I couldn't care less how many countries are south of the US border. All I know is that most of the people here from there are lawbreaking crooks sucking our system dry. Too bad if you don't like that, but they's the facts, and we have lots of data now to back that up.

Posted by: BIOH on May 8, 2008 11:44 AM

Gonzalo -- You've certainly got a point about how "Hispanic" is a majorly broad category, and we should be wary of generalizing. On the other hand, we don't generally mind talking about the category labeled "Americans," and generalizing about them. So maybe it's OK after all. As for the lameness of whining on blogs ... Well, sure, yeah. On the other hand, as PatrickH says, one of the main obstacles to anything happening in the manly extraverted sense is the fact that the issue isn't yet sufficiently recognized as an issue. It hasn't arrived on the conference table yet, where manly extraverted types might do something with it. That's partly because the traditional media have consciously and unconsciously done their best to keep it off the conference room table. It's largely due to blogs that the issue has any traction at all. So maybe "making an important issue a little more recognized, public, and recognized as legitimate" is doing something after all.

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on May 8, 2008 12:33 PM


If you’re not reading what I’m writing then there’s no point in wasting my time with you. You put words in my mouth and assume I’m for positions I’m not. I’ve never “conflated” anything nor made excuses for people who break the law. I don’t know what you mean by “Hispanics like me” but idiots like you who can’t write in their own language (“they’s the facts”) look real bad when insulting others on account of their ethnicity. Then again, you’re just an anonymous coward exhibiting bravado behind a screen name.

You’re right. I don’t define how you use the language. Reality does. Most people from those countries are NOT migrating to the U.S. nor are they interested in doing so. A lot of them live perfectly good lives in their home countries and have access to the quality education that was clearly denied to you (maybe it’s also the illegal immigrants’ fault that you don’t know basic grammar). I’m not wasting my time with you anymore so don’t bother replying.


Generalizations are OK depending on the context. I think that saying “Hispanics have stronger family values than Americans” or “Hispanics are more likely to abort their kids than Americans” makes no sense. I don’t think that in that context the word Hispanic is very accurate. People know there’re vast cultural differences between someone from, say, Alabama, and someone from New York. Why can’t they do that when it comes to those they like to call Hispanics? Argentina and Guatemala are two “Hispanic” countries. Guatemala is more indigenous while, proportionally speaking, Argentina is probably a whiter country than the U.S. Their cultures are vastly different too and I know you understand that. It just baffles me when people like Mr. “I-define-the-language” can’t wrap their brain around such obvious observations. As BIOH would say, “they’s the facts”.

As for blogging, there’s certainly a place for that in public debate. Nonetheless, it seems to me that some of the more vociferous of anti-immigration people limit their activism to blogging anonymously. If people are berating their politicians for selling out or their lack of character when it comes to immigration, the least they could do is exhibit some character themselves. I made this question before and I think it could provide for an interesting debate. Why is it that anti-immigration political parties in the European Union manage to get people elected while all you get in the U.S. are bloggers? The mainstream media in Europe is just as hostile to them as it is in the U.S. and they have to operate under pretty restrictive speech laws on top of it.

Posted by: Gonzalo on May 8, 2008 2:30 PM


You seem to be missing something. We have done something. We stopped the attempts at amnesty -- if there were a real media in this country that story might have received some coverage. We went against the Democratic establishment, Republican establishment, Corporate interests, Minority lobbies and the media, and we won -- just a bunch of us concerned folks calling our "representatives" and screaming on talk radio and banging our keyboards on blogs. That is one hell of a story. Please, tell me what recent stories are bigger than that?

The anti-illegal faction has won. Illegal immigration is (surprise) against the law. What do you want us to do. Make it against the law times two with a cherry on top?

That is the point. The democratic process is not being respected. The laws are being ignored. We are being thrown out of our role as citizens. Let us have one clown from the media circus ask the candidates and politicians about that. It would be a question they couldn't weasel out of with phony platitudes about hard work and family values -- or perhaps they could in this lame era.
We have done everything we are suppose to do in this system, and we have won the day. The fact that the tyranny that vetoes our victory is still in power is not a reflection of us, it is a reflection of the idiots who don't see it or choose to ignore it.


Posted by: sN on May 8, 2008 5:23 PM

Hey Gonzalo,

I'll put my education up against yours any day. I'll put my education up against the hordes of hispanics who are running here too, and I'll beat all of ya'!

HISPANICS ARE RUINING AMERICA! WE ALL KNOW IT. If life is so great south of the border, its time to go back. Why deny the hordes of hispanics a high quality of life? Don't these dipsticks know what is in their own best interest?

Freeloading Jose and Maria know how to filch, that's for sure. The illegal alien "immigration debate" was over about a year ago, and we all remember how it turned out (NO!). Now its just a matter of forcing the government to do our will.

Posted by: BIOH on May 8, 2008 8:44 PM

Gonzalo: People know there’re vast cultural differences between someone from, say, Alabama, and someone from New York. Why can’t they do that when it comes to those they like to call Hispanics?

On what basis are you assuming they don't? You acknowledge that nobody makes false inferences about all whites from the statement that "Hispanics are 'x'% more likely to do 'y' than whites", so I don't know on what grounds you conclude that people lack the ability to do the same with the label "Hispanic". (Richard seems to be the only one around who can't seem to grasp that Californios aren't Oaxacans.) If GB can figure out that "'Hispanic' is a stupid label invented in the U.S. for census purposes to describe immigrants who come predominantly from Mexico and a handful of other countries south of the border", it's a good bet that everyone else in the U.S. knows who's talking about whom when it's used in the U.S.. (With "purposes", of course, expanded beyond census use to include pandering, race-hustling, pork-barreling, etc., etc., etc.)

As for your notion that there's some unique "they" (Anglos?) that "likes to call" people "Hispanics", and that everybody labeled "Hispanic" in the U.S. is all pissed off about it and groaning under the weight of the gringos inability to understand their vast cultural differences - well, suffice it to say, that's not really what's going on in the wonderful world of American identity politics.

You're making a lot of unwarranted assumptions about people's perceptions that wouldn't hold up to scrutiny. E.g., somebody's quoting "Hispanics are 'x'% more likely to do 'y' than whites", in the context of an American political debate, doesn't tell you anything about the state of their knowledge regarding the racial composition of Argentina. (If American immigration restrictionists thought Argentina was just like Mexico, one would never come across exasperated whites talking about emigrating there to escape Mexifornication.) Trust me, Gonzalo, nobody's using "Hispanic" to express anxiety about hordes of Argentinians or Chileans pouring across the border. (Heh - maybe Argentina and Chile should be considering steps to secure their borders against crazed hordes of dispossessed Anglos.) In sum, you're expending a great deal of energy trying to correct a non-existent misunderstanding.

I agree, though, that terms like "Hispanic" and "non-Hispanic white" are lousy, because they're "codes", dishonest usage that marks political corruption.

P.S. There are hundreds of immigration-enforcement bills, passed or pending, in probably every state affected by illegal immigration. (Some of these go back decades.) It is, of course, an ongoing battle, since open-borders interest groups and their useful idiots always deploy rapidly to gut them, judicially or otherwise (mercifully, not always with success), and cheap labor lobbyists pretty much own Congress. So it's simply not true that "nobody's doing anything about it".

P.P.S. I don't know what you call an acute accent mark in Spanish, but that thingie (ó) isn't a tilde (ñ). Unless I'm completely senile.

Posted by: Moira Breen on May 9, 2008 11:01 AM

It's interesting that "Hispanic" has become a code word indeed. Perhaps it's because we don't want to confront the fact that it is mestizo Latinos who are undesirable, and not the more Euro Latinos, such as the people of Chile and Argentina. But there's little chance of anybody putting the issue in such frankly racial terms as saying, "It's not Spanish-speakers, or Latin Americans in general we don't want. It's the low-IQ, low-skilled, illiterate, uneducated peoples of those countries. And that means the mestizo, half-mestizo [i.e., quarter Indian--Gonzalo, what would they be called?] and Indian populations that we want to keep out."

It's probably closer to the truth, a truth that Gonzalo has been sorta circling around in his own particular way. "Hispanic" isn't the point, or the problem. That's a language category. It's the racial reality that's the problem. But I can't see even the most hard-core restrictionist coming out and saying that.

Posted by: PatrickH on May 9, 2008 12:30 PM

Hi Moira,

I'm not making any assumptions about "whites" or Americans as a whole because that would contradict my own point about Hispanics. I think you're misreading me. I’ve tried to be careful not to insult anyone because of his race or make unwarranted assumptions and generalizations. The only person I’ve responded to rather harshly is the anonymous BIOH, who in his last post made my job easier by confirming all I’ve said before regarding his education, intelligence and inability to write in English.

By making claims such as “Hispanics are more likely to do X compared to Whites” the assumption that most Hispanics behave in a certain manner is implicit. That’s what started the argument. I couldn’t tell you how many people take these generalizations at face value but I’m sure it’s more than just BIOH and his penchant for insulting anyone who happens to live south of the border in his own broken English. As a matter of fact, both McCain and the people who refuted his claims did just that.

Somebody said that the anti-immigration crowd had already won last year. That strikes me as complacent and the reality in the border says otherwise, not to mention that any of the U.S.’s three next possible Presidents supported the failed bill and they’re likely to push for it again. I could talk more about this but I’d rather do it privately. While there are people who are genuinely interested in discussing the issue, you can’t help but attract cowardly trolls who can barely write. If you’re interested, you’re more than welcome to email me but I won’t keep posting here.

Regarding your P.P.S., the thingie on top of the “o” is, in fact, called a “tilde”.

Posted by: Gonzalo on May 9, 2008 12:36 PM

Gonzalo writes again, just proving my assertions of his inferior intelligence, classlessness, nose-picking, and overall pathetic existence! He makes argumentation so easy!

The truth of the matter is that many people here, including me, have done an awful lot more than blog about illegal hispanic aliens. Its just that the blogosphere is one front, and quite important. Its changed a lot of pathetic PC minds for the better, as they have to face the truth that the mainstream media won't report.

The point of the posted topic is that hispanics are far more dysfunctional than whites. They are a big minus sign. They subtract from the quality of life of everybody around them, except blacks, which is really saying something.

Of course, when you point this out to the brown apologists (aka hispanics), they give the same ol' bullshit line the blacks give--"we're all individuals, you can't lump us all into the same group!"

Yes we can! Would you like to know why, Gonzalo? Because we don't have just you here, WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER HISPANICS TOO!

Isn't it a damn shame that the hispanics are so dysfunctional? Tsk tsk tsk! I guess it just doesn't play out that you're just like everybody else, particularly the whites.

The real truth is that almost all the minorities look at whites and the good things they have, and say:

"You know, they're no better than us! If we just lived in the same country as they did, we'd do just as well! They just steal everything!"

So they run to the white countries and live shoulder to shoulder with the hated white thieves. And when they realize that they are not the same, they go into a state of cognitive dissonance, where they can't admit the truth. They really aren't as good.

Abortions, bastard kids, crooks, tax cheats, drug users, street gangs, failing schools, closing hospitals, welfare fraud, affirmative action, drunk driving, wife beating, etc.--the list goes on and on. Its quite a price to pay for a hamburger cook, a lawn mower, or a cleaning lady. Hispanic family values--what a laugh!

Gonzalo is still pushing thee same ol' racist nonsense. If you don't like your country being illegally overrun by worthless hispanics, you are a racist, and you have a problem. You can't believe your lying eyes and those damn statistics. Hispanics should be judged as individuals, until there are enough of them here to shoulder you out, then its back to the tribe. Its just another variation on the same theme.

Go to sleep, little sheep. Watch your movies and read your books until the country is ruined. Tribalism is for bad people. You don't want to be bad now, do you? Sit back and play nice until its all over. Pseudo-Gonzalo, the internet propagandist, says so!

Posted by: BIOH on May 9, 2008 11:00 PM

This blog is turning into one of those pathetic neo-Nazi forums where dicussion is dominated by he who screams and insults the loudest. If BIOH is going to represent us white Americans I can't help but feel ashamed.

Posted by: Rex on May 10, 2008 3:48 AM

Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember your info?