Americans First – Citizenism as a Moral Principle to Regulate Immigration

[Kulindahr]

^
You know, Republicans originally believed, as a republican principle, that those with more to lose, who are generally the same as those with the most means, had a greater responsibility. For those who claim this is a Christian nation, that should be a no-brainer, since it's a principle Jesus annunciated.

On that issue, Elizabeth Warren is more republican than the Republicans.

 

[TX-Beau]

I think that died out with Eisenhower.

There used to be Progressive Republicans also.

 

[xbuzzerx]

^
You know, Republicans originally believed, as a republican principle, that those with more to lose, who are generally the same as those with the most means, had a greater responsibility. For those who claim this is a Christian nation, that should be a no-brainer, since it's a principle Jesus annunciated.

On that issue, Elizabeth Warren is more republican than the Republicans.

You mean crazy ideas like the conservative business and military industry interests that profit off an unnecessary war should be shouldering a disproportionate burden of paying for the war?

 

[TX-Beau]

You mean crazy ideas like the conservative business and military industry interests that profit off an unnecessary war should be shouldering a disproportionate burden of paying for the war?

I don't know if you're old enough to remember this, but the 'Pubs used to bill themselves as the party of civic responsibility and elder statesmen.

 

[opinterph]

Education since integration has largely focused on equalizing RESULT. The problem is that it has not worked well resulting in a tendency to make the curriculum easier, narrowing the gap. Over all, easier courses is not a good thing.

July 12th, 2012
http://www.justusboys.com/forum/thr...rimary-Education!/page3?p=8223175#post8223175
This post has been deleted by opinterph.
Reason: generalized baiting; inflammatory; moderator discretion

I don 't disagree with what you say, except that we need to prioritize math, science etc. When we learn to teach the basics, then we can expand to include other languages, but languages should not be at the expense of science and math.
We are not supposed to say this, but the other problem is that after integration in the 60s it became the most importsnt goal of the teaching establishment to equalize attainments among the blacks and immigrant groups with whites. That gaol is facilitated by sluggish levels of attainment, since it minimalizes differences among levels of attainment. And low attainment facilitates the purpetual claim that more and more, and more money is needed.yeah, yeah, i am not being politically correct.

I do not believe I used the words " decent people" as such, in describing the assimilated majority.

July 12th, 2012

Nonsense. Republicans do not want to alienate them. BUT Democrats live by pandering to your list, buying the votes of of minorities, promising them welfare, social programs, law suits, charity etc, all at the expense of taxpayers.
But descent people have to work and pay taxes to pay for the give-aways, and it is hard to keep up with the freebies. We are the Republicans.
But you are correct that it is only a matter of time. Abortion and immigration will eventually reduce the taxpayers to a minority and the US will be a poor, third world country.

I did not say charity does not belong in economic policy, but that it is not a workable economic system.

July 15th, 2012

Yes, it is called pandering. But we must question your word "helping". While welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, and now free health policies for many are appealing to blacks, the long term effect is to lock many into poverty. The safty net has become a multiple generational way of life. The actual statistics are appalling. Now Obama has eliminated the pretence that welfare recipients are required to work.
Meanwhile immigrants come in in large numbers, take jobs, and move up the economic ladder.
Charity is not an economic system.

I said jobs and employment outweigh the value of the laws against discrimination not the value of non discrimination.

May 3rd, 2012

It is a fair question, Patrick, but not easy to answer in a paragraph.
I am not optimistic the economy can be saved. We no longer have any national agreement on an economic system and the Dems do not among themselves have an agreement.
We should, of course, keep Soc Sec, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, Workers Compensation. Most liability for acts of employees. Some of the programs are going broke but above my pay grade.
Beyond that we need to recognize that not legislating against something does not mean approving it. The government should not try to legislate away all unfairness. With that in mind we should do away with or substantially alter the rest of the stuff on my list. Most are counter productive if you try to look at them pragmatically.
Lets look at the lawsuits for discrimination. Yes, there was a time when blacks were virtually excluded from most employment, and the Civil Rights law was needed. But then, the laws were extended, so no they cover everyone or virtually everyone, with the possible exception of straight white males. So, while we are depriving the employer of the right to hire the best without regard to race, ethnicity, gender,etc. any benefit has been watered down to virtually nothing. If an employer wants to discriminate against blacks, for instance, he can simply hire another protected minority. An legal immigrant just off the boat is protected from discrimination just as is a black person. How is that fair? There is pressure to hire a cross-section of the country, but that involves a systematic discrimination against some qualified employees, often the best. If a highly qualified black person applies to a company with its full contingent of blacks, will it be sued for discriminating against a Muslim, or Hispanic, etc?
Then too, protected minority people have greater plausibility in suing for discrimination in promotion etc in employment. That means they are a more risky hire than someone with less protection. Minorities are more likely to file suit. Who wants that? All those problems go away when jobs are sent to another country.
Perhaps we should continue to protect blacks, based on prior history and present status, but the rest should go. This does no mean we approve of discrimination, but not every unfairness should be litigated, and the need for jobs and employment outweighs the desirability of lawsuits.
Harassment suits should go for the same reason.
Remember, from the companies point of view, everything on my list is a cost of employment. They reduce the amount that many companies have to spend for salaries without benefiting MOST of the employees.

I do not recall saying blacks committ more crime, as such. I have pointed out that one in three black men spend time in the penitentiary.

March 29th, 2012

Try thinking for once. To understand the figures you have to look at the details. Lets take a look at one red state, South Carolina, remembering that blacks in the south overwhelmingly vote Democrat. Whites (including Hispanics) are 69.12 percent of the population and Blacks 29.7. BUT, Blacks commit 59% if rapes vs 39 for whites and Hispanics,
BUT white females are 60% of victims of rape vs 39, black; Robberies; whites and hispanics 359 vs 1380 for blacks; HOMICIDES whites and hispanics 24% vs 75% for blacks. http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2011/05/14/south-carolina-the-color-of-crime-rape-robbery-homicide/

Now the truth comes out that the red state statistics are distorted by all those Black Democrat criminals.

Did I say democrats are anti white?

March 6th, 2012

Remember the overwhelming victories for Republicans in 2010. The most significant swing is that 60% of whites voted Republican, while Pat Rendell of PA famously said:blacks and hispanics are the heart and soul of the Democrat base. Since the Civil War the Dems have been the "anti" party, pandering to the minorities by demonizing the majority. In the 1880s Ingersoll famously called the the party of "rum, Romanizm [Catholic immigrants] and rebellion [the south]. There was a realignment during the depression.
Now the historic alignment prevails. The Republicans are the assimilated majority. The Dems are the anti party. Anti white, anti wealth, anti business, anti capitalism, anti Christian. A collection of minorities united by their resentment/hatred of the majority and responding to Democrat pandering to them.
Dem politicians are very aware of this. They resist all efforts to stem the flood of immigrants, while doing everything they can to facilitate abortion of Americans babies.
A couple of years ago, Clinton made a speech to a muslim group, saying that by 2050 there will no longer be a white majority and that will be a good thing.

 

[TX-Beau]

Your perseverance is astonishing.

 

[Benvolio]

Since your quotes go back almost two years, I think the qualifications I made today more accurately reflect the original statements than your summaries.

 

[TX-Beau]

Since your quotes go back almost two years, I think the qualifications I made today more accurately reflect the original statements than your summaries.

...and we've arrived at:

 

[xbuzzerx]

Since your quotes go back almost two years, I think the qualifications I made today more accurately reflect the original statements than your summaries.

This has largely all been the same crowd for those two years. We've seen you spew all this stuff and then you try to wiggle out of the same consistent things you've said about everything for two years whenever called out on it. Even when someone can show you your own words and posts saying exactly what we said you said.

If you feel you are made to look bad by someone recalling your own damn words to you then think about who the problem is-- not all of us liberals "mis-labelling" you.

 

[Kulindahr]

I noticed Ben's old statement that Democrats are "anti-Christian". That's a rather ridiculous claim to make, since it's Republicans who fight any law that helps people plus fight for laws intended to put their particular moral notions ahead of all others. The latter especially is anti-Christian.

 

[Benvolio]

Yeah, like the North Carolina legislature and Governor passing laws which slash state income taxes on the wealthy, and dramatically raised taxes on the poor?

Yes, Republicans are eager to raise taxes, if it only affects people they don't like. Of course that "dragnet" catches some poor [rednecks] in it as well, but it really harms most of the people whose skin isn't "white" enough, etc.

Republicans only believe in tax relief for those in the higher echelons of the economy, and please throw the full onus of the cost of government on those who are busting their asses to survive.

It is difficult to comment on your non specific assertion, but we know that democrats always distort what Republicans do. The Bush tax cuts gave the largest rate cuts to the low income groups and the lowest rate cuts to those at the top. But the democrats lied and claimed the cuts benefited only the rich. When the cuts expired the dems wailed that it was a huge increase for the low income people. Your lack of specificity suggests a similar distortion is at work.

 

[xbuzzerx]

It is difficult to comment on your non specific assertion

Trust us, we can relate to this entirely.

 

[Rolyo85]

The problem is that hardworking, talented immigrants only make the problem worse by pushing aside existing Americans, and by working cheap, bringing wages down. We are making no progress against poverty.

That's patently false. All of us in specialized fields compete with the exact same parameters Americans do. I'm not getting paid less for my work, that would be fucking insulting.

Of course, in your mind immigrants - being lesser beings - have no dignity but only desperation, so they're totally cool with being paid less in 100% of the cases.

 

[Kulindahr]

That's patently false. All of us in specialized fields compete with the exact same parameters Americans do. I'm not getting paid less for my work, that would be fucking insulting.

Of course, in your mind immigrants - being lesser beings - have no dignity but only desperation, so they're totally cool with being paid less in 100% of the cases.

That and the fact that it's well-established that talented, hard-working immigrants start more businesses than do 'existing' Americans, thus providing more jobs for those existing Americans.

 

[opinterph]

---

POLICY REGARDING RACIAL OR ETHNIC NATIONALISM​

 

[Benvolio]

Obama says that immigration should be our number one legislative priority, but now we cannot discuss a priority for citizens, because you have added your concept of "citizenism" (not in my dictionary)? I do not see much point in the Current affairs And Politics forum if you are going to keep changing the rules to outlaw any but liberal notions.

 

[Benvolio]

One of the more frightening things about liberalism and the democrat party is this strong tendency to silence all dissent. America is being invaded and injured by the invasion, but we must not speak in defense of our country because that would violate some newly invented liberal dogma. If you ever wonder why I think your philosophy and your party are consummately evil, I want you to remember this thread.

 

[chrisrobin]

One of the more frightening things about liberalism and the [STRIKE]democrat[/STRIKE] Democratic party is this strong tendency to silence all dissent. America is being invaded and injured by the invasion, but we must not speak in defense of our country because that would violate some newly invented liberal dogma. If you ever wonder why I think your philosophy and your party are consummately evil, I want you to remember this thread.

I think your philosophy and your party are consummately evil

y tu tambien.

 

[palbert]

---

POLICY REGARDING RACIAL OR ETHNIC NATIONALISM​

Acting surprised that the forbidden match causes a fire?

[/thread]

 

[bankside]

Obama says that immigration should be our number one legislative priority, but now we cannot discuss a priority for citizens, because you have added your concept of "citizenism" (not in my dictionary)? I do not see much point in the Current affairs And Politics forum if you are going to keep changing the rules to outlaw any but liberal notions.

Oh, I don't know about that. This rule seems to be directed at political rantings with a well established connection to ideologies of racial superiority. But surely the Republican party can bring ideas to the table without recourse to racist claptrap. Right? Surely that is possible.

For example, they could take a page out of the policy book of Socialist Canuckistan! In Canada we unabashedly prioritise immigrants based on their having a higher skill level. What we do not do is presume that an immigrant will be an economic drain, based on their non-Canadianness, who will go on to "steal jobs" from "real Canadians."