Matthews said Republicans "have a right to fear" seeing a "majority Latino population"; challenged Goodman: "Do you live in a Mexican neighborhood?"
SUMMARY: Chris Matthews claimed that House Republicans who recently passed a bill that would apparently criminalize undocumented immigrants, their employers, and those who provide aid to them "have a right to fear" a "cultural change" that would result in their home states and towns "becom[ing] overwhelmingly Mexican."
On the March 30 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews claimed that House Republicans who recently passed a bill that would apparently criminalize undocumented immigrants, their employers, and those who provide aid to them "have a right to fear" a "cultural change" that would result in their home states and towns "becom[ing] overwhelmingly Mexican." Matthews was responding to a suggestion by guest Amy Goodman that "the Republicans who passed the House bill" are "afraid" that the United States will soon have "a majority Latino population." After Goodman -- the host of the nationally syndicated radio program Democracy Now -- remarked that "I think about the United States as a country of immigrants" and that there "is no reason to stop that tradition now," Matthews challenged, "Do you live in a Mexican neighborhood?"
Matthews later suggested that "90 percent of this country" agrees with the "viewpoint" that "I didn't move to Mexico; Mexico moved to me, and I'm complaining about it." He added: "If these were northern Europeans pouring across the border, nobody would care."
From the March 30 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, which also featured conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt:
GOODMAN: Chris, I think we have to have a comprehensive, humane immigration policy. But I think right now, what the Republicans who passed the House bill, for example, are afraid of -- they're afraid of the fact that in a couple dozen years, we're going to see a majority Latino population in Arizona --
HEWITT: That's nonsense.
GOODMAN: -- in Texas, in Florida, in New Mexico.
HEWITT: They're afraid of a dirty bomb.
MATTHEWS: But why shouldn't they -- why shouldn't they fear that?
GOODMAN: And that's why the Republicans are so desperate they want to build a fence.
MATTHEWS: Wait a minute, why shouldn't they fear that? They have a right to fear that. Cultural change is not something any society accepts easily, or even with any kind of positive feelings about it. Why would anybody accept a cultural change in their own state?
[crosstalk]
MATTHEWS: I want Amy to answer this question. Why is it wrong of anybody to say I don't want the town I grew up in to become overwhelmingly Mexican? Why is that wrong? You may not share that view, but why is that wrong?
GOODMAN: I guess I think about the United States as a country of immigrants, of people --
MATTHEWS: Of course!
GOODMAN: -- who have come here for refuge all over the world, and there is no reason to stop that tradition now. It only enhances what this country could represent. I am not saying that anyone at any time should be able to come over the border. I'm saying we have to have a comprehensive discussion about this that is not led by punitive measures that criminalize human beings.
MATTHEWS: Do you live in a Mexican neighborhood?
GOODMAN: I live in an integrated neighborhood of many different people.
MATTHEWS: No, I'm asking a particular question. Now, let me ask you this question, because a lot people in small towns in California grew up in a town, all of a sudden it's going from 20 percent Hispanic and nobody complained -- it probably went to 30 percent, but when it becomes 70 and 80 percent or over 50, they say, "Wait a minute, I didn't move to Mexico; Mexico moved to me, and I'm complaining about it."
Now, that's their point of view. It's not my point view necessarily, but that's a point of view that apparently is reflective of about 90 percent of this country, and certainly 90 percent of the Republican Party.
HEWITT: No, that's not true. Chris, that's not true. I don't believe that. I absolutely do not believe that. The culture issue is not the issue. It's a security issue. I live in Southern California.
MATTHEWS: It's a security issue?
HEWITT: Santa Ana is the largest --
MATTHEWS: But Amy's right, they don't cause the terrorism.
HEWITT: No, it is the largest concentration of Mexicans living outside of Mexico is in Santa Ana. I live five miles from there; it does not bother me in the least. It does not bother most Californians. It's always-- California is a mixed society, majority-minority society. That's not the issue.
The issue is the stress on social services. It's wildly expensive. Health care is extremely expensive. But more importantly, I think this immigration debate is being driven by the vast majority of Americans and certainly in the Republican Party by a concern that a dirty bomb is going to come over that border, and then it will be too late to change it, and then the wall will go up. We can stop that.
MATTHEWS: I disagree. I think -- I think it's ethnic, I think it has to do with the change in cultural realities of this town like Watsonville in California that overnight changed completely, and the people don't want that kind of change.
HEWITT: (inaudible) the Central Valley, I just drove through it, those vegetables have been picked for decades by Latinos. It's not the culture issue.
MATTHEWS: I disagree.
HEWITT: It's the economy issue, and it's the --
MATTHEWS: If these were northern Europeans pouring across the border, nobody would care.
Anyway, thank you, Amy Goodman. Thank you, Hugh Hewitt. We all disagree, I guess.
MATTHEWS: No, I'm asking a particular question. Now, let me ask you this question, because a lot people in small towns in California grew up in a town, all of a sudden it's going from 20 percent Hispanic and nobody complained -- it probably went to 30 percent, but when it becomes 70 and 80 percent or over 50, they say, "Wait a minute, I didn't move to Mexico; Mexico moved to me, and I'm complaining about it."
Now, that's their point of view. It's not my point view necessarily, but that's a point of view that apparently is reflective of about 90 percent of this country, and certainly 90 percent of the Republican Party.
Where does he gets his numbers?? He uses a lot of straw men and then uses apparently fake numbers.
Further: for Matthews it is race that is the problems and for Hewitt it is because illegal immigrants/ legal US mexicans are those who bring a dirty bomb or that anyone else brings one, and then in a sudden it is about social services.
Do people had a problem with New Orleans being a 'choclate city'? What about all the illegal immigrants right now. Is there any reliable data that suggests they will move from whereever they live now to stock the small towns? I do not think so. I think it will remain the smae, and after a few generations they are 'real' Americans. That is what happened with most immigrants.
[link to www.time.com]
In contrast to yesterday:
[link to mediamatters.org]
71% favor MAJOR penalties for people who hire Illegal Workers. I haven't seen any mention of Penalties in both of the Republican Plans, the House or Bush. Surprise, Surprise!!!
Y'know, Latinos are humans, too. It's not like Alien Invasion or Bodysnatchers. Of course, cons don't like them -- because they're racists.
www.democracynow.org
Aren't you depriving a village somewhere of an idiot?
You cons really never have anything to add to a discussion, do you? Typical.
Guy,
You are a racist.
There, beat you to it. Lynn can add you to her list of racists.
I am keeping tally. I want to marginalize racists and expose them to the world as the backward segment that impede the progress for normal segment of humanity. How about that smart ass. In effort to try to stereotype me as the AA obsessed with race you make yourself look silly.
Must...fear..others...not...like...me...
Mexicans...invading...home...
Metion ...dirty...bomb...next...will...say...'terrorists'...to...scare...everyone
When will Olberman give Matthews the Worst Person Award. We all know where O'Reilly is coming from. Matthews gets a free pass. C'mon Keith, stop picking on the predictable and easy target, hold one of your owns feet to the fire for once.
"I disagree. I think -- I think it's ethnic, I think it has to do with the change in cultural realities of this town like Watsonville in California that overnight changed completely, and the people don't want that kind of change."
I went to the high school there. How in the world does Matthews know that town even exists? It's a pretty small town. Just weird to have him mention it.
Matthews asked: "Why would anybody accept a cultural change in their own state?"
Uh, I dunno, Chris... maybe it's because that's what intelligent, civilized, tolerant members of a society do!
By the way, the level of ignorance in this country is further elevated when the most common images shown by the MSM during illegal immigration stories are those of brown skinned people picking something or doing yard work.
MATTHEWS: Wait a minute, why shouldn't they fear that? They have a right to fear that. Cultural change is not something any society accepts easily, or even with any kind of positive feelings about it. Why would anybody accept a cultural change in their own state?
[crosstalk]
MATTHEWS: I want Amy to answer this question. Why is it wrong of anybody to say I don't want the town I grew up in to become overwhelmingly black (Mexican)? Why is that wrong? You may not share that view, but why is that wrong?
GOODMAN: I guess I think about the United States as a country of immigrants, of people --
MATTHEWS: Of course!
GOODMAN: -- who have come here for refuge all over the world, and there is no reason to stop that tradition now. It only enhances what this country could represent. I am not saying that anyone at any time should be able to come over the border. I'm saying we have to have a comprehensive discussion about this that is not led by punitive measures that criminalize human beings.
MATTHEWS: Do you live in a black (Mexican) neighborhood?
GOODMAN: I live in an integrated neighborhood of many different people.
MATTHEWS: No, I'm asking a particular question. Now, let me ask you this question, because a lot people in small towns in California grew up in a town, all of a sudden it's going from 20 percent black (Hispanic) and nobody complained -- it probably went to 30 percent, but when it becomes 70 and 80 percent or over 50, they say, "Wait a minute, I didn't move to Africa (Mexico); Africa (Mexico) moved to me, and I'm complaining about it."
Now, that's their point of view. It's not my point view necessarily, but that's a point of view that apparently is reflective of about 90 percent of this country, and certainly 90 percent of the Republican Party.
-----
You know, it's one thing to be an honest devil's advocate. But I'm having a hard time seeing that that's what's going on here.
...I urge white folks to move from white neighborhoods to multi-racial neighborhoods. The change that Matthews fears is immutable. With enough cash, you can delay it by buying a house in a gated community, but multi-racialism is coming and all the complaining and fretting won't change that fact. So, why not participate in the change? Why not have a say in the change? Why not ease it by moving into a multi-racial neighborhood and being a good neighbor? I live in a multi-racial neighborhood and it works. It's hip. Not an anachronism of Jim Crow days and less overt racism.
is not whether you like immigrants, but whether they are here legally. If they are not, they should be looked at.
When I go home I am in a multi-ethnic house. My wife is Indian/Puerto Rican and I am German, Italian, Welsh, Native American and?????.
and are they in America legally? That is the question. Most of the Immigrants that came to America, came here legally. What is wrong with that?
I'm a 4th generation Mexican-American and have some roots that criss-cross and extend through both sides of the border since the Spanish first set up shop on the North American continent.
That being said, Matthews should understand these points:
(bear with me, here, once i get going, i tend to ramble a bit)
1. If Mexico "moved to you", at least it's not like a reverse of the 1840's where the Mexicans are taking the land by armed force, because dips**t seems to forget that a VERY SUBSTANTIAL chunk of the American West *was* Mexico until "Manifest Destiny" demanded otherwise
(a point doubly iterated because of the amount of Native American blood in me that gives me that year-round indoor and outdoor tan)
2. I'm getting awfully sick and tired of the anti-immigrant crowd always trying (however subtly) to implicate every last immigrant and non-white ethnic group as being inherently criminal... you boil all the crap these people spew to it's purest essence and all they're saying is "OOOOOO... scary brown people!!!" (After all, isn't that roughly half of what set the fundies churning over Janet Jackson's t*t? the remainder of the fuss being that we were being menaced by a nipple of mass destruction)
Frankly Everything i learned as a teenager about delinquency and criminality came from my nice fair-skinned Scottsdale brats schoolmates from "good, respectable" Republican families who parroted Nancy's "Just Say No" BS while profiting from the New Prohibition
3. Matthews, dude... have you ever worked in an onion field? do you have the slightest idea how badly it murders your social life if you don't hang out with fast food employees? would you do something like that for minimum wage or like the old-fashioned paid-by-weight-you-picked basis?
No? Didn't think so, tweety.
the man should just put his presidential-seal embroidered kneepads back on and resume his ongoing marathon of publicly fellating just about every republican guest, politician and talking point that , er... comes his way
you are my rapture.
And a very funny guy.
Multi-culteralism is part of the norm. We should all embrace it. I did. I'm a better man for it. It's just so sad that Matthew's racism is so transparent.
the question is whether the Immigrants are here legally. If not, their Citizenship should be questioned.
From hence forward I will refer to this day the 31st of March in 2006 as racist Friday. How far you have fallen Chris.
I noticed the same thing. Racism has been pretty covert for years. Now, it's overt again. Remember when Howard Cosell once referred to a black player as "that little monkey" and his career ended? Cosell even had a history of standing by Ali when few would, but that didn't protect him. But yesterday, right wing pundits felt compelled and safe to say things that far surpassed "that little monkey." I don't believe in chance happenings. Something has shifted, socially and politically, for such hate-mongering to surface. It's always been there, of course, but these folks are feeling empowered to articulate their hatred of difference and change.
It started when they gained control of everything ...the media, and all branches of government. They're power crazed now and each segment of the right wing base consequently are embolden particularly the fanatics and crazies. You've got the right wing Christian fanatics advising on Supreme Court appointments and instigating silly legislation (the Save Terri Schaivo bill) and the right ring racist and bigots are as the kids say "off the hook" now. Being deliberately offensive doesn’t take courage it just takes hatefulness and bad manners. I think that soon one of them is going to eventually use the N-Word on a radio show or in a column and they're going to get in trouble. I see that coming and of course the MMFA anti Pacers will defend it.
So, the neocons and their far right wingers are drunk with power? And the n-word is coming. I think you're right. And I think, with 98%, plus or minus 2 percentage points, of American blacks voting for the Dems, maybe they don't care. That constituency is lost, so why not pander to the racists in their fold? Why not garner the press?
Where's MSNBCs execs on Mathews suggestions that a majority Latino America would be a bad thing.
I love media matters but ask that you be careful when you occas attempt to bend the truth on incidents from tv. I watched Matthews this day and you take out of context what he said.. that looks bad on you here at media matters and we don't need that... we need you!!!
Chris has his up and down days we all know that.. but i feel he was expressing honestly what the rights intentions were on their bill they are trying to pass..
As for me, i'm a liberal or an independent libera.. either way i don;t find this illegal immigration a political problemm this issue crosses the aisle..
I am liberal and I don't support these illegals coming here staying here or getting away with their illegal entrants.. I'm sick of them carryiing their mexican flag on the streets in protest and skipping school pretending like they have a clue what the real issues are.. cuz they don't ..their kids..
and this waiving the mexican flag tells you where they really stand.. they don't give a damn about this country or being a part of america.. they want cash for blue collar work and to send it back home. they add nothing of value to this country, their language is a pain the ass to deal with, their skills are lack luster.. they bring nothing of value here imo..
now careful for those who may not agree, you probably live up north and don't deal with them.. i live in the midst of what they've brought to this country.
I'm gonna state this again. If you are a white liberal, do more than opine about racism. Participate in change. The United States is diversifying. Move this along and move to a diverse neighborhood. If circumstances preclude this, open your home to diverse people. And if you don't know people that look different than you, then do something about that.
as long as the Immigrants are here legally. The point of Legality seems to be secondary to trying to be non-racist. These are two serarate issues.
against Illegal Immigrants is NOT Racism. It is a protest against law breakers.
There is a lot of racism fueling some of the people in this debate. It's not totally about who's breaking the law-much of it is about hatred for Latinos. On one occasion I even saw an anti-illegal-immigration group go to bat for a German teenager who was living in Ohio (I think) on an expired visa-I'll see if I can dig up the story.
“Wait a minute, why shouldn't they fear that? They have a right to fear that. Cultural change is not something any society accepts easily, or even with any kind of positive feelings about it. Why would anybody accept a cultural change in their own state?”
What about the Palestinians since the start of the Zionist movement? If it’s OK for Zionism then you should have no problem with Reconquista. Or do you have double standards?
“Why is it wrong of anybody to say I don't want the town I grew up in to become overwhelmingly Mexican? Why is that wrong? You may not share that view, but why is that wrong?”
Please substitute Jewish for Mexican.
“No, I'm asking a particular question. Now, let me ask you this question, because a lot people in small towns in California grew up in a town, all of a sudden it's going from 20 percent Hispanic and nobody complained -- it probably went to 30 percent, but when it becomes 70 and 80 percent or over 50, they say, "Wait a minute, I didn't move to Mexico; Mexico moved to me, and I'm complaining about it.”
The same thing happened in Palestine since 1890 and the homegrown population doesn’t like it. Are they wrong? If so why the double standard?
.......separate..........
Mathews CLEARLY asks questions and made statements that suggest the US being a majority latino is a bad thing as if latino isn't European!!!
He sounds like OWrongly when he asked what a guy would he have a problem with America being mostly black.
I'd hate to be latino of any color and being working for Mathews right now.
Thanx
Yeah, he said it in a stupid way by starting his agreement with Goodman with, "Why is that wrong?" but I think it's much more of a "I don't want our country to be 40% Latino" question than a "I don't want a dirty bomb to come across the Mexican border" question. I mean don't you think it's true if it was our North border that not as many Republicans would care about this? But it's a legitimate fear (I wanna make sure I delineate properly between "legitimate" and "prudent") that one's country is going to change significantly culturally. Any minority can tell you that being in the minority is a much different feeling than when in the majority. Why do you think that people still (in general) hang out mostly with people of their own race? I think he's agreeing with Goodman in the fact that for many Republicans, the issue is more race-related than security-related (which is a thing many Democrats would agree with). But also sympathizing with that view. He sympathized quite a bit too much, but I'd agree that it's not necessarily "racist" to fear a dramatic cultural shift in one's home.
We have got to hand it to the Tweety Bird. He stradles the fence like no other. I suspect he senses a Dem victory in the elections, so he is keeping his pocket book open to the inevitable. This whole issues is pure unaduterated racism. Why dont we hear the clamor for stopping the Candians, or the Western and Europeans? Simple, the they are like us metality become the dictator. Let us address the real problem. These Free Trade agreements led by the US dumps the poor further into the hole of hopelessness, and lifts rich Corp. America into the stratosphere. Therefore it is critical that the new Latin American leadership is stressing Inter-LATAM coopeeration, leading to independence from the influence of the pro-US World Bank and IMF. The selfish policies of US greed has opened up a sleeping Giant. Look at India, China, Venezuela, et al. And now we have the new Free Trade Zone that stretches from India, through S. Africa, and to Brazil. Look out US!
He's wrong, in my opinion, about how people would respond to hordes of Northern Europeans pouring across the borders: actually, the last time this happened, people did care. The time period was the mid nineteenth century and the northern Europeans were the Irish, who starting arriving in the United States in large numbers after the Irish potato blight of the 1840s. Anyone familiar with the history of the Irish in America knows that there was a huge amount of discrimination against them initially. There were the same worries about massive cultural change, the same stereotypes of the immigrants as shiftless, crime-prone slum dwellers, and the same heated crypto-racist, anti-immigrant rhetoric that we have vis-à-vis the Mexicans today. Irish-Americans were eventually, of course, fully assimilated into the broader society. But it took generations for this to happen, and it was only after immigration in general became highly restricted in the mid 1920s.
In a way, even though Matthews was wrong about this, I think it actually supports his broader point. Average people don't react well to big ethnic and demographic changes of any sort -- and as much as one thinks they ought to accept it, it's naive to expect that they will. But their grandchildren probably will.
-K.Ai.-
Numerous times, DOUGSOMERS has said (and I paraphrase) the issue is not with immigrants, but ILLEGAL immigrants. This implies that the burden of illegal actions falls on the immigrants, but I want to examine that assumption.
First, let me ask "Why are these illegal workers here?" The answer: "To get money to give their families a good life." A very admirable motivation. Should it matter that they're not American? Well, yes, since they do use our public services and don't pay taxes, but is the fact that they don't pay taxes they're fault? Who hires them? Who gives them jobs? Who gives them money "under-the-table?" Most likely, who is really making out like a bandit here?
Maybe we should go after the businesses that hire undocumented worker (instead of the criminalizing these workers.) Laws need to be passed to protect American workers by making these businesses conform to ethical and social regulations. We've targeted the wrong target, and in doing so we show our cultural bias (lassez faire, free-market society) and possibly our racial fears (ethnocentrism and racism.)
Let's use one of the foundational instutions of conservative thought, economic's supply and demand. By targetting the companies we will decrease the demand for undocumented workers and therefore decrease the supply. Not only that, but it is easier, has better ethics, and is more aesthetically pleasing than building a wall on our boarder and/or patrolling it heavily. Plus, by slapping companies with ultra high penalties for using undocumented workers, the program will be a heck of a lot cheaper too.