In latest NBC plug for Buchanan's anti-immigrant book, Matthews declared that "thanks to this show," book will "probably" remain "number one on Amazon"
SUMMARY: For the fifth time in four days, Pat Buchanan appeared on NBC or an NBC-owned cable channel to promote his new book, which asserts that the United States must keep "Americans of European descent" from becoming the "minority" in order to "survive[]."
For the fifth time in four days, an NBC-affiliated program hosted Pat Buchanan to promote his new book, State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America (Thomas Dunne Books, August 2006), which, as the weblog Think Progress has noted, asserts that the United States must keep "Americans of European descent" from becoming the "minority" in order to "survive[]."On the August 24 broadcast of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews introduced Buchanan, an MSNBC political analyst and former presidential candidate, by announcing that State of Emergency is "currently number one on Amazon" and that "thanks to this show," "it'll probably stay there."
As Think Progress noted, Buchanan's book is filled with controversial statements about the threat of immigration; it criticizes The Washington Times for "summarily fir[ing]" columnist Sam Francis, now deceased, for claiming that, in Buchanan's words, "Western civilization was superior and that only Europeans could have created it." Referring to Francis's claim that race is "the Great Taboo," Buchanan wrote that "to submit to the Great Taboo is like not telling one's doctor of a recurring pain that could kill you." As Media Matters documented, Buchanan's book also includes the following claims about the purported threat of immigration:
- "This [immigration] is an invasion, the greatest invasion in history." [p. 5]
- "We are witnessing how nations perish. We are entered upon the final act of our civilization. The last scene is the deconstruction of the nations. The penultimate scene, now well underway, is the invasion unresisted." [p. 6]
- "Chicano chauvinists and Mexican agents have made clear their intent to take back through demography and culture what their ancestors lost through war." [p. 12]
- "[W]e are in the midst of a savage culture war in which traditionalist values have been losing ground for two generations." [p. 28]
On Hardball, Buchanan repeated his claim, as he detailed during his August 21 appearance on MSNBC's Imus in the Morning, that the "reconquista ... is well underway." As Media Matters has noted, "reconquista" is a term associated with the movement to recapture the southwestern United States for Mexico. Buchanan explained that the difference between Irish immigrants and illegal Mexican immigrants, in his opinion, is that "the Irish didn't say 'Hey, you Americans stole our country and we'd like the East Coast back.' The folks in Mexico believe" the southwestern United States "belongs to them." As evidence, Buchanan claimed that Mexican immigrants "are not assimilating. They remain loyal, patriotic, loving Mexican citizens" who "maintain their culture, their language, their identity." Matthews later appeared to agree with Buchanan's assertions that Mexican-Americans do not assimilate, saying, "I don't think anybody out there pushing Spanish is trying to unite this country."
This is the fifth time in four days that Buchanan has appeared on NBC or an NBC-owned cable channel to promote his new book. As Media Matters has previously noted, Buchanan also appeared on the August 23 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, as well as on the August 23 edition of CNBC's Kudlow & Company, the August 22 edition of NBC's Today, and the August 21 edition of Imus in the Morning.
From the August 24 broadcast of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Welcome back to Hardball. Are illegal immigrants from Mexico invading the United States? Is Mexico encouraging its poor to hop the fence to greener pastures? Is George Bush inaction an impeachable offense? Here to answer all those questions in a certain way is Patrick J. Buchanan, MSNBC political analyst and the author of State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America. It's currently number one on Amazon. It'll probably stay there for a while thanks to this show.
Pat -- thank you for joining us. Why is George -- let's talk politics. Politics is what you and I have in common. We may not agree about it, but we both are fascinated by it. Why is George Bush pro-Mexican immigrant? Period. Legal or not? Why does he like it?
[...]
MATTHEWS: So, it's numbers you don't like. It's the numbers. It's not the people.
BUCHANAN: It is not only the numbers, the Irish didn't say, "Hey, you Americans stole our country and we'd like the East Coast back." The folks in Mexico believe, 58 percent of them, believe southeastern United States -- southwest -- belongs to them. Secondly, they come into the country, they are not assimilating. They remain loyal, patriotic, loving Mexican citizens. They maintain their culture, their language, their identity. The numbers are huge.
[...]
MATTHEWS: That's old politics. That is old ethnic politics. It's been going around forever. Keep the communities isolated, keep them unassimilated, then you can own them. I accept that part of it. And I don't think anybody out there pushing Spanish is trying to unite this country.
BUCHANAN: All right, let's take crime.
MATTHEWS: But I think you got to -- here's one challenge I want to put to you. How do you stop -- let's assume the fact we're stuck with who's here just the way it is. How to you stop the guys coming over tonight? That's what I keep asking people. Let's deal with this as a dynamic. There's people trying to get over tonight. Is anything really going to stop them as long as there's a job here for them?
BUCHANAN: Sure. You get a 2,000-mile security fence over there, and the huge crowds coming in will be stopped. Border Patrol can handle the rest. Then you start prosecuting businessmen. Then you cut off all welfare. Then you interpret the 14th Amendment to say, "Look. Look, sweetie, you can come over here and have your kid in the hospital -- we'll take care of you -- but you and the child are going back, 'cause the child is not an American citizen under the 14th amendment; it's got to be under the jurisdiction thereof. And you're an illegal alien, so you weren't under our jurisdiction, so the child's not an automatic citizen."
Remove the magnets in this country, Chris. A security border along the border, Eisenhower there -- one million tried to come in 1954 -- Eisenhower called in this tough general, [then-commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service Lt. Gen.] Joseph May Swing, and said, "Deal with it." They dealt with it. They were deporting everybody. The problem was solved. What's lacking is courage and will and intestinal fortitude.
Tweety, how can you get through the door with that swelled head.
I think he must mean "thanks to people who don't think things through all the way before they vote..."
If you don't think this passive takeover is going on you have not educated yourself. Reconquista advocates were everywhere in the pro illegal immigration rallies in March, April, and May. Along side the mothers pushing their kids in carriages were radical left socialist screaming Pilgrims back to Europe this is our land. And nobody stooped them or complained. What does that tell you? Get you head out of the sand and get real. This is happening.
More hispanics in the US? Who speak Spanish?
And this should worry me because...?
I'm sorry, but the U.S. cannot be a haven for every third world poverty case. I believe the newcomers should be required to go through the legal process first. Our country has set traditionally set limits on immigration. I know people who HAVE gone through the process. It involves commitment, time, and patience. More power to them.
The issues are manifold. If you live in the southwestern U.S., you already know about the burden on housing, health care, emergency services, wage levels, crime, (including the coyote gangs who are trafficking in human cargo), and governmental agencies who must deal with this phenomenon.
This is not a us vs them, liberal/conservative, or racial issue. It is a NATIONAL issue of import. Overpopulation DOES affect all of us eventually. Our growth rate is too high. Buchanan may be a dolt on race and social issues; he is not totally off base on this one. I observed two pro-immigration rallies that took place in Phoenix and there were an awful lot of Mexican flags waved. Are those folks loyal to Washington, or Mexico City?
[blockquote]"What exactly is happening?
More Hispanics in the US? Who speak Spanish?
And this should worry me because...?"[/blockquote]
Let's take S. Florida where I live for example. The United States opens up it's doors to the Cuban community because of the political strife in their own country. In return for that kindness many of the new arrivals refuse to assimilate. Many don't speak English and proudly call themselves Cubans with American papers. They force there customs, culture, and language on the very people that opened their doors to a better life. Forcing them to change or get out. By the hundreds of thousands English speaking American citizens have left S. Florida for points north. Feeling like foreigners in there own country. Not welcome or wanted by a Latino community expanding and growing more powerful year after year. This is ethnic self segregation not economic.
I could mention S. California or any other border state where this phenomena is happening but I'll stop at my first example. If you think this is good or is meaningless you really have your head in the sand.
A country doesn't need to competing languages that helps fractures people physically and culturally. Open your eyes this is happening as we spaek. Sitting on the side lines while this massive demographic change happens is wrong and unpatriotic. George Washington would roll over in his grave.
Those poor persecuted white people.
Ain't nobody makin' nobody go nowhere. This country is wide open to its citizens and they control where they live. So don't blame the unassimilated. Blame the intolerant dupes who have to have it their way.
I live in Southern Arizona, so I see the effects of this immigration. I am not intimidated by it, and I'm not scared. I don't give a f**k what language other people speak, and I don't care if businesses want to make money by being bilingual.
What you two fail to understand is that the problem is not immigration - this country's entire foundation is on immigration. The problem is that some immigrants are here illegally. I say make sure businesses who hire illegals are punished, and at the same time, make sure that immigrants get a fairly easy way to resident status. Or are you saying that the US can only hold a certain number of people? In that case, you won't solve that by stopping immigration.
Your arguments make no sense. Just like with terrorism, it seems that the republicans are so fricking scared that it's ridiculous. Face your fears and solve the real problems - don't create scapegoats and fear.
Our country can only handle so many people and therefore so many immigrants. According to the US Census by 2050 our country will increase by 120 million and that is conservative. By 2100 our countries population will double. The majority of that is from legal and illegal immigration. Imagine what our cites and roads will be like. They are already overloaded and maxed out now.
Making it easy for "immigrants" to gain residency will only give incentive and propel others to do the same. We need less immigration not more. Every poll says that, except of course when immigrants are asked that.
"Imagine what our cites and roads will be like. They are already overloaded and maxed out now."
Yeah... you think that maybe they'll build more? Just a thought.
But by all means, keep fighting these windmills...
Your a lost cause. Your so in love with the idea of diversity and "mutliculturism" thru immigration that the thought of what it will do to this country is the farthest thing from your mind. In your head all they have to do is bulid more more houses and roads and that will take care of it. Well don't trust me, why don't you ask any enviromental expert or population expert. Or you just don't care cause this country can handle the limitless impoverished masses that want to come here for a "better" life while at the same time turning this country into what they came from. Which is a third world ghetto. Your a lost cause in my book.
NEXT....
Xenophobic, racist nativists like yourself have been telling us this bulls**t since immigration started to occur in this country. OMG THEY'RE TAKING OUR JOBS! THEY'RE NOT LEARNING ENGLISH! THEY'RE CRIMINALS! WE'RE ALL GOING TO F**KING DIE IF THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE SOMETHING BESIDES WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANTS KEEP COMING HERE. It's a load of crap used to justify bigotry and white-supremacy. We don't buy it, take it somewhere else.
GLOBAL ORGANIZED LABOR FORCE.
Remove the economic impetus for immigration and labor outsourcing.
As for cultural deterioration; whether you believe in Creationism or evolution we are all descendants of common ancestry. So love you brother from another mother.
It was just reported $11 BILLION was sent to Mexico from U.S. by "remittances" first half of this year. (That is just one method of transfer of funds).
Last year $20 B.
It is now Mexico's second largest source of income behind tourism.
That's a lot of highways and cities _OVER THERE.
More than a slow bleed on our assets.
Sounds like people spending their money as they please.
If it's a bad thing for them to be sending money abroad, is it also bad to donate to charities that operate outside of the U.S.?
If you don't think this passive takeover is going on you have not educated yourself. Reconquista advocates were everywhere in the pro illegal immigration rallies in March, April, and May. Along side the mothers pushing their kids in carriages were radical left socialist screaming Pilgrims back to Europe this is our land. And nobody stooped them or complained. What does that tell you? Get you head out of the sand and get real. This is happening.
- Netram
-----------------------------------------
Thanks for awakening me to the danger of a non-white majority. My God, what would happen to us African Americans? Oh what would we do if white racists were in the minority.
So your a black person who is all for the impoverished, unskilled, uneducated masses of the third world coming here and taking many of the jobs that your fellow brothers are in now performing? Cause that is what will happen and is happening now. Hello New Orleans. Their cheap slave labor will undercut any American wage and when that happens who will be out of a job? Us not them.
The more our liberal immigration policies push the White Anglo European majority into a minority there will be resistance. It's a natural human instinct and it doesn't have to do with being a member of the KKK. As an example, the same would happen if Blacks were a majority or Latinos were a majority but immigration policy was pushing White Anglos into the majority. Everybody wants to be the majority. It's human nature.
Latinos/Hispanics/Mexicans have already passed Blacks as the majority minority ethnic group in this country. And as their numbers swell and yours remains stagnant, you will see more resistance in your community to. Less power, less money and less attention will come their way.
Latinos are chomping at the bit in anticipation of becoming the majority in this country. Don't think so? Just go to any Hispanic chat room and pretend your Hispanic and talk about the subject. I have and that is a reason I know they are chomping at the bit.
But for some reason it's Latino pride when Latinos plan and anticipate becoming a majority but if it's the white folk desire to remain the majority it's nothing but racism. Sorry, I don't prescribe to that hypocrisy. You can be Black or Brown or Red or Yellow or yes even White and have pride in your race without it being broken down to the filthiest common denominator, racism.
...what would they do that's so horrible? Force us to learn Spanish as well as English? Only Americans seem to think it's a virtue not to know a second language. What? You think they'll make everybody Catholic? The Catholic Church has been repressed in Mexico since the rise of the PRI. Do you honestly think they'd willingly put the yoke of a state religion around their necks? What precisely would they change about American society? Tell me what bringing the language of Cervantes, of Garcia Lorca, of Calderón would ruin in America. Tell me what a bunch of people who want good jobs, respect, and greater opportunities for oheir kids would screw up in America.
Do you think they're going to round up all the Anglos and put them in camps? Is that it?
Well, then, maybe we'd better make sure the Bill of Rights stays good and strong, shouldn't we?
I live in a small city in Illinois that was, at the last census, 30% latino, almost all of it Mexican.
My Mexican neighbors are honest, friendly, take better care of their yards than I do, and are in general great people. And the Mexican grocery stores have real butchers' counters,.
I don't know what on earth you think is so scary about them. Jesus Christ, you sound like an antebellum Southerner talking about slave revolt or something.
Excuse Heru and I if we find arguments that people that are not of European descent are somehow a danger to America discomforting. I am quite comfortable with who I am and I am sure Heru is as well, and I am sure that we both find Pat's suggestion that non-Europeans are some how less capable of being good Americans insulting. So I encourage all you right wingers to keep the racial rhetoric down and speak to the real issues of illegal immigration because when you introduce you’re objection based on the cultural origins of Hispanics who make up the majority of the illegal immigrant population you leave the impression that if they were of let's say British heritage you wouldn’t be quite as upset. In other words stop playing the RACE CARD.
And I am about as Anglo-Saxon as they come
We invaded Iraq for a lesser threat.
Heck, these evil socialists are already living among us, eegad! that is so scary! So, if there is even a 1% chance that this 'passive takeover' could harm our righteous nation, I say, INVADE MEXICO! Eradicate the enemy with a massive, decisive preemptive strike!
Today Mexico, tomorrow the WORLD!
Please dude, your paranoia is almost comical. Seek help before you hurt yourself or others.
with the way this sorry excuse of a white man is fear mongering. And of course Matthews is afraid too. Poor little Tweety. "Too many brown people. They scare me. Wah Wah."
And what's wrong with maintaining your cultural identity anyway? Isn't that part of what makes America great? Sure. I can understand the importance of assimilation, learning English, but its important to remember one's cultural roots.
Sure. There may have been a segment of activists barking for "Reconquista." But I would like to think they are a very loud vocal minority not unlike the jihadists.
It's currently number one on Amazon. It'll probably stay there for a while thanks to this show.
What was REALLY funny was on the Imus in the morning show (also MSNBC), I-man took umbrage to the statement as he prides himself as having the greatest impact on getting books top seller status.
Note: The Iman of NYC's cultural center on KUDLOW and Company this evening called America "MOTHER OF THE WORLD" and praised the fact we allow illegal imigrants to come into this country and use our social services, work and send money home amounting to our supporting 50 MILLION PEOPLE.
(Just FYI: The iman gave this response to a question by Mr. Kudlow about whether deportation should be a U.S. policy regarding Imans preaching destruction of Israel and America. (iman of Cleveland is convicted of supporting terrorist orgs. and promoting the destruction/conversion of America. His deportation is pending appeal. The NYC Iman finally agreed deportation would be "OK" IF guilty, when Mr. Kudlow asked him directly after the above tirade).
How nice to recieve the praise of a Islamic clergy-man regarding our generosity towards the Mexicans.
That's all we here from the right on Cable TV, and Lies.
It's kind of interesting to hear someone say they could care less if illegals or even legals come here, refuse to learn the language, go on welfare, get Section 8 housing (free or close to it) break down our economy, overrun our emergency rooms which are already closing and others are barely holding on, depressing wages, and over crowding our schools.
So what does that say about your ability to wonder if our country will survive if it simply becomes a place for every illegal or even to some extent ever legal who wants to come here.
So let me ask all the open borders and amnesty for all crowd.
How many more illegal mexicans, OTM's and legals can we afford to support in this country?
Seriously, IF you think you can refrain from falling back on the tired old discredited argument of RACIST, then tell me if there is a number when the USA simply can't support itself or thillegals?
Another 100 million?
Another 200 million?
Another 300 million?
Five hundred million?
Do you think it should ever reach the point where se say, sorry but we are completely full up?
Is there a point when you believe wages are depressed enough?
That all companies should be allowed to bring any workers in from any country and pay them whatever low wages they can get away with?
SO tell me, if you can get away from the simplistic racist comment, if there reaches a point.
Or never, get all the people who can get here from the rest of the world and give 'em whatever they want? Welfare, medical, school, housing, etc, cuz you know they ain't all gonna work.
So tell me, what would you do?
Or do you just not care?
Or are you afraid it might ruin your open borders and amnesty for all creds?
"It's kind of interesting to hear someone say they could care less if illegals or even legals come here, refuse to learn the language, go on welfare, get Section 8 housing (free or close to it) break down our economy, overrun our emergency rooms which are already closing and others are barely holding on, depressing wages, and over crowding our schools."
Do you have any examples of someone saying the above? Or are you just using the old strawman standby?
By the way, it's "couldn't care less".
You're the one relying on tired, discredited arguments against immigration. Here is a quick rundown of the facts.
1. The 1996 welfare reform act disqualified undocumented immigrants from almost all means-tested programs. They can't recieve medicare, medicaid, section 8, AFDC, food stamps or any of that. If you don't believe me, you can do about 5 minutes of research on the Migration Policy Institute's website and find out for yourself. The only thing undocumented immigrants are allowed to recieve under federal law are K-12 education and emergency medical treatment.
2. Most immigrants do pay taxes. All pay local and state property and sales taxes (the former through rent). Many also pay personal income and payroll taxes through IRS issued tax-numbers in a program created in 1996. Immigrants pay way more in taxes than they recieve in benefits, and even if they didn't, they're drain on the budget is minimal. Federal and state welfare programs only amount to 2% of the combined federal and state budgets, that's a drop in the bucket compared to what military contractors recieve for "reconstruction" efforts that move at a snails pace and screw over the poor.
3. Mexico's population is only 107,449,525. We're not going to see the entire country come over the border, which we would have to to meet the criteria for your first question.
4. Cultures always assimilate into the wider society. There was a similar hysteria over Italians, Pacific Asians, Irish, Jews, and many others not assimilating, and yet they've amnaged to. Just look at third generation Latinos currently living here, of whom 80% speak english as the dominant language (google the report from the Pew Hispanic Center) and the other 20% are blingual. Learning the language is a neurobiological function and children naturally do it way better than adults, which leads everyone to integrate with their surroundings within a generation or two.
1) Last time I looked, Spain was in Europe. Mexico was a European colony for far longer than we were. (oh, and by the way, you've just made one of the most racist Anti-African-American statements I've seen in a while--and that's saying something.
2)If you think Mexican Americans love the Mexican government, and are acting secretly to annex the southwest, you know no Mexicans at all. Come to think of it, that's a pretty good assumption.
3) Assimilate means (among other things) to learn English. You seem to think it means to forget Spanish. Got news for you: it doesn't.
4)You guys have been screaming about the demise of American culture since the middle of the 19th Century. Well, I've got more news for you: with each new influence we've assimilated, American culture has gotten stronger, not weaker. The America of 1900 was an anemic copy of European culture. Up against Wagner, Brahms, Debussy and Verdi, we had what? Stephen Foster? Our literature , our painting, our sculpture, our drama were all slavish provincial copyings of Europe. By 2000, American music, art, drama dominate the world, because we accepted Africa, , Asia, and Central and South America into our cultural mix. For a century you bigots have been moaning about our decline as a culture, and for a century our influence in the world has done nothing but grow..
5) I've got a deal for you: The day your followers take down every instance of that symbol of anti-American secession and high treason against the United States of America--and I'm talking about the Stars and Bars of the Confederacy--we'll start talking about Mexican flags. What was your excuse for flying the battle flag of the army that tried longer and harder than any other to destroy the USA? Was that 'but it's their heritage!" I hear?
6) Gee, Pat, if the hispanics come to power in the Southwest, we may have to start calling our cities things like San Francisco! Los Angeles! San Diego! San Antonio! And maybe rename states to things like California and Colorado! How will we ever make the shift?
7) If the choice ever came down to living in your idea of America and in Aztlan, you know where I'd like to live? You really want to know?
Exactamente - there I did it. I said a Spanish word and the world didn't end. Anyway I agree with the above posts completely.
I keep thinking that really all these crybaby whiners have absolutely no confidence in the ideals, culture, and resourcefulness of the our institutions.
I believe immigration should be regulated and done legally. Almost everyone agrees with that. So put away that strawman.
I also think, like in past waves of immigration, that there is a process of adjustment that does challange us to be our better selves or our worst. All you righty crybabies should make us all proud. Maybe you can show the world what our wonderful culture is truely about.
Pat B. and all the crybabies should realize that NAFTA has made a unified North American economy and if they don't want to hear Spanish and smell mole in their colonias, they should start working on creating a more functional North American economy and quit worrying about our culture - one that has pretty much saturated the entire world.
As far as Aztlan goes, the irony is pretty funny if you know your history. Of course I doubt Lou Dobbs would want to go over that. In the meantime I doubt many Mexicans would want to come here and bring thier government with them, considering its current difficulties - that is unless the idiot white braindead immigrant backlash pushes people to protect themselves - another irony lost on the wimpering white resistance.
To stop contaminating these comment boards with his bold font.
Mathews uses his program to promote his half-baked views and used guests for shameless self-promotion, all with a stupid smirk ala George Bush.
Borders, language,culture...blah-blah-blah. These two: Buchanan and "Savage"...they are the same man, only I've never heard of Weiner-Savage beating up a cop while he was a drunken frat boy. Gee, almost sounds like the President. When does Buchanan get back to his forever agenda of Jew-bashing, Amen Corner lobbies, and the kind of low-rent racism that made him a horror joke among thinking conservatives as well as progressives?
Here is the Bible on the reality of "diversity" and "Multiculturlism" taking to the extremes as it is happening in The United States right now. America isn't the melting pot anymore its a steam cooker that one day will explode.
I HAVE A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA RICHARD D. LAMM Democratic Governor of Colorado 75-87
I HAVE A SECRET PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. IF YOU BELIEVE, AS MANY DO, THAT AMERICA IS TOO SMUG, TOO WHITE BREAD, TOO SELF-SATISFIED, TOO RICH, LETS DESTROY AMERICA. IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO DO. HISTORY SHOWS THAT NATIONS ARE MORE FRAGILE THAN THEIR CITIZENS THINK. NO NATION IN HISTORY HAS SURVIVED THE RAVAGES OF TIME. ARNOLD TOYNBEE OBSERVED THAT ALL GREAT CIVILIZATIONS RISE AND THEY ALL FALL, AND THAT "AN AUTOPSY OF HISTORY WOULD SHOW THAT ALL GREAT NATIONS COMMIT SUICIDE." HERE IS MY PLAN:
I. WE MUST FIRST MAKE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY. HISTORY SHOWS, IN MY OPINION, THAT NO NATION CAN SURVIVE THE TENSION, CONFLICT, AND ANTAGONISM OF TWO COMPETING LANGUAGES AND CULTURES. IT IS A BLESSING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO BE BILINGUAL; IT IS A CURSE FOR A SOCIETY TO BE BILINGUAL. ONE SCHOLAR, SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET, PUT IT THIS WAY:
THE HISTORIES OF BILINGUAL AND BICULTURAL SOCIETIES THAT DO NOT ASSIMILATE ARE HISTORIES OF TURMOIL, TENSION, AND TRAGEDY. CANADA, BELGIUM, MALAYSIA, LEBANON-ALL FACE CRISES OF NATIONAL EXISTENCE IN WHICH MINORITIES PRESS FOR AUTONOMY, IF NOT INDEPENDENCE. PAKISTAN AND CYPRUS HAVE DIVIDED. NIGERIA SUPPRESSED AN ETHNIC REBELLION. FRANCE FACES DIFFICULTIES WITH ITS BASQUES, BRETONS, AND CORSICANS.
II. I WOULD THEN INVENT "MULTICULTURALISM" AND ENCOURAGE IMMIGRANTS TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN CULTURE. I WOULD MAKE IT AN ARTICLE OF BELIEF THAT ALL CULTURES ARE EQUAL: THAT THERE ARE NO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THAT ARE IMPORTANT. I WOULD DECLARE IT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT THE BLACK AND HISPANIC DROPOUT RATE IS ONLY DUE TO PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE MAJORITY. EVERY OTHER EXPLANATION IS OUT-OF-BOUNDS.
III. WE CAN MAKE THE UNITED STATES A "HISPANIC QUEBEC" WITHOUT MUCH EFFORT. THE KEY IS TO CELEBRATE DIVERSITY RATHER THAN UNITY. AS BENJAMIN SCHWARZ SAID IN THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY RECENTLY:
...THE APPARENT SUCCESS OF OUR OWN MULTIETHNIC AND MULTICULTURAL EXPERIMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED NOT BY TOLERANCE BUT BY HEGEMONY. WITHOUT THE DOMINANCE THAT ONCE DICTATED ETHNOCENTRICALLY, AND WHAT IT MEANT TO BE AN AMERICAN, WE ARE LEFT WITH ONLY TOLERANCE AND PLURALISM TO HOLD US TOGETHER.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL IMMIGRANTS TO KEEP THEIR OWN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE. I WOULD REPLACE THE MELTING POT METAPHOR WITH A SALAD BOWL METAPHOR. IT IS IMPORTANT TO INSURE THAT WE HAVE VARIOUS CULTURAL SUB-GROUPS LIVING IN AMERICA REINFORCING THEIR DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN AMERICANS, EMPHASIZING THEIR SIMILARITIES.
IV. HAVING DONE ALL THIS, I WOULD MAKE OUR FASTEST GROWING DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP THE LEAST EDUCATED - I WOULD ADD A SECOND UNDERCLASS, UNASSIMILATED, UNDEREDUCATED, AND ANTAGONISTIC TO OUR POPULATION. I WOULD HAVE THIS SECOND UNDERCLASS HAVE A 50% DROP OUT RATE FROM SCHOOL.
V. I WOULD THEN GET THE BIG FOUNDATIONS AND BIG BUSINESS TO GIVE THESE EFFORTS LOTS OF MONEY. I WOULD INVEST IN ETHNIC IDENTITY, AND I WOULD ESTABLISH THE CULT OF VICTIMOLOGY. I WOULD GET ALL MINORITIES TO THINK THEIR LACK OF SUCCESS WAS ALL THE FAULT OF THE MAJORITY - I WOULD START A GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY BLAMING ALL MINORITY FAILURE ON THE MAJORITY POPULATION.
VI. I WOULD ESTABLISH DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND PROMOTE DIVIDED LOYALTIES. I WOULD "CELEBRATE DIVERSITY." "DIVERSITY" IS A WONDERFULLY SEDUCTIVE WORD. IT STRESSES DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN COMMONALITIES. DIVERSE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE ARE MOSTLY ENGAGED IN HATING EACH OTHER-THAT IS, WHEN THEY ARE NOT KILLING EACH OTHER. A DIVERSE," PEACEFUL, OR STABLE SOCIETY IS AGAINST MOST HISTORICAL PRECEDENT. PEOPLE UNDERVALUE THE UNITY IT TAKES TO KEEP A NATION TOGETHER, AND WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS MYOPIA. LOOK AT THE ANCIENT GREEKS. DORF'S WORLD HISTORY TELLS US:
THE GREEKS BELIEVED THAT THEY BELONGED TO THE SAME RACE; THEY POSSESSED A COMMON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE; AND THEY WORSHIPED THE SAME GODS. ALL GREECE TOOK PART IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES IN HONOR OF ZEUS AND ALL GREEKS VENERATED THE SHRINE OF APOLLO AT DELPHI. A COMMON ENEMY PERSIA THREATENED THEIR LIBERTY. YET, ALL OF THESE BONDS TOGETHER WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO OVERCOME TWO FACTORS . . . (LOCAL PATRIOTISM AND GEOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS THAT NURTURED POLITICAL DIVISIONS . . .)
IF WE CAN PUT THE EMPHASIS ON THE "PLURIBUS," INSTEAD OF THE "UNUM," WE CAN BALKANIZE AMERICA AS SURELY AS KOSOVO.
(continued below)
started above
VII. THEN I WOULD PLACE ALL THESE SUBJECTS OFF LIMITS - MAKE IT TABOO TO TALK ABOUT. I WOULD FIND A WORD SIMILAR TO "HERETIC" IN THE 16TH CENTURY - THAT STOPPED DISCUSSION AND PARALYZED THINKING. WORDS LIKE "RACIST", "XENOPHOBE" THAT HALTS ARGUMENT AND CONVERSATION.
HAVING MADE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY, HAVING ESTABLISHED MULTICULTURALISM, HAVING THE LARGE FOUNDATIONS FUND THE DOCTRINE OF "VICTIMOLOGY", I WOULD NEXT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS. I WOULD DEVELOP A MANTRA - "THAT BECAUSE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN GOOD FOR AMERICA, IT MUST ALWAYS BE GOOD." I WOULD MAKE EVERY INDIVIDUAL IMMIGRANT SYMPATRIC AND IGNORE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT.
VIII. LASTLY, I WOULD CENSOR VICTOR HANSON DAVIS'S BOOK MEXIFORNIA — THIS BOOK IS DANGEROUS — IT EXPOSES MY PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. SO PLEASE, PLEASE — IF YOU FEEL THAT AMERICA DESERVES TO BE DESTROYED — PLEASE, PLEASE — DON'T BUY THIS BOOK! THIS GUY IS ON TO MY PLAN.
"THE SMART WAY TO KEEP PEOPLE PASSIVE AND OBEDIENT IS TO STRICTLY LIMIT THE SPECTRUM OF ACCEPTABLE OPINION, BUT ALLOW VERY LIVELY DEBATE WITHIN THAT SPECTRUM." — NOAM CHOMSKY, AMERICAN LINGUIST AND US MEDIA AND FOREIGN POLICY CRITIC."
You're really, really scared, aren't you? Pathetic.
YOU wingnuts have already done plenty to destroy America. YOU guys brought us BUSH. Nuff Said
I'm a moderate Moonbat you so far left wing you've left the building tree hugging bleeding heart America hater. I feel better now.
For Centuries. Canada is also bilingual I dont see it having destroyed either country. No, logic, all bigotry all the time. You have embarrassed yourself and if you had an ounce of decency you would be ashamed. There are reasonable arguments to make about illegal immigration. Buchanons bigotry has no place in reasoned discourse and niether does yours.
Quebec tried twice to seperate itself from Canada via referendum. The second time in 1995 it was rejected by a slim majority (50.6% NO to 49.4% YES); a clear majority of French-speaking Quebecers voted in favour of sovereignty. Those French speaking Quebecers have promised to try agin in the future. Bilingualism is sure working in Canada.
Straddling the cultural boundary between Germanic and Romance Europe, it is linguistically divided. Mainly two languages are spoken in Belgium: Dutch is spoken by the 6 million people in Flanders to the north, French by the 4 million Walloons in the south. The capital, Brussels, is officially bilingual, while the majority of its residents speak French. Around 70,000 people live in the German-speaking Community in the east of the country.
Belgium is not bilingual. Most people speak one language depending on geographic location. This linguistic diversity often leads to political and cultural conflict and is reflected in Belgium's complex system of government and political history.
Yea I realy want my country to go in that direction. We have enough problems with one language in government. Let's add another layer of complexity with a few more.
Try again.......Maybe Yogoslavia or N. Ireland... Not!
You're really, really, brain dead, aren't you? Typical.
...Switzerland.
If this is the best example you've got then "Houston we have a problem"!
Language fight erupts in federal government
Interior Minister Pascal Couchepin has strongly criticised the election of a new government speaker on Wednesday.
Couchepin, a native French-speaker, said Swiss Germans and the centre-left Social Democrats had formed a pact to exclude candidates from the minority language regions.
On Wednesday Oswald Sigg was elected to the post of spokesman and vice-chancellor. Corina Casanova was elected joint vice-chancellor. Both are native German speakers, although Casanova comes originally from Romansh-speaking eastern Switzerland.
Sigg replaces Achille Casanova who comes from the Italian-speaking south of the country and who had resigned from the post. There are now no representatives of the southern canton of Ticino at a senior level in the government administration.
"I am perturbed by the way this procedure was carried out, and the result that was obtained," Couchepin told Le Matin Dimanche newspaper.
"There was an alliance between German speakers and Social Democrats which resulted in the exclusion of the minorities," said the centre-right politician..........
"We have to say to the German majority, and those who sided with them for party-political reasons, that they are playing a dangerous game."
[link to www.swissinfo.org]
War of words breaks out in government
A row has broken out in Switzerland over whether the number of minority-language speakers in senior civil service positions should be increased.
Supporters say it is crucial that top jobs in the federal administration are shared out proportionally in a multilingual society.
The latest controversy over whether speakers of the minority languages – French, Italian and Romansh – are discriminated against came after the appointment of two members of the majority German-speaking population to high-ranking posts in the Federal Chancellery in April.........
[link to www.swissinfo.org]
That a country be free of any controversy in order to be a success? No wonder you take the position you do. Of course you advocate ethnic cleansing (because that's what you're talking about.) Well, I've got news for you, bub. Switzerland has been a free and independent dnation, accommodating multiple ethnicities, for something close to a thousand years. And you know why? Because it's a democracy. It's had no aristocracy, no visiions of martial grandeur, and no dreams of empire. And it gives everyone a voice. If you think that controversy shows the Swiss Confederation is on the verge of breakup, you 're completely ignorant. ("Quick! let's Google something bad on Switzerland!") My family is half-Swiss, and my sister lives there. Ik know what I'm talking about. America accommodates multiple cultures for the same reason Switzerland does: because it's a democracy. Because everyone gets a voice. It's true that you have to learn English to get along in this country. You seem to think that you also have to forget Chinese, or Polish, or Yiddish, or Spanish. Why? Your model for a nation is Greater Serbia. And I'll have none of it.
The government signs in Switzerland are in four different languages! Who wants that? We need one Unifying language. Guess what the National and Official language of Mexico and Cuba are? Spanish. They got it right!
I'm against illegal immigration and massive legal immigration that will change my countries character, charm, and identify so drastically it will be unrecognizable in 50 to 100 years. The melting pot does not work as we hope. We have a smorgasbord for all the starving of the world who want to partake. Multiculturalism at this level fractures physically and culturally. If Americans were pouring over the border into Mexico by the millions do you not think the same kind of nationalism would be going on there? If you disagree with that then you are ignorant and biased yourself.
I welcome everyone here. And so do most people that have the same opinions as me. That's the problem with you pro massive immigrants bunch. Anyone that is against your agenda is a bigot and a racist. I had a Cuban partner for eight years and one of my best friends is black so don't call me a racist. That is soooooo lame and desperate and so wrong.
Yesterday there was an anti illegal immigration protest in Maywood, Calif. Maywood is 96% Latino/Mexican/Hispanic. Maywood is a "sanctuary" city. About half it's 45,000 residents are illegal. During the protest the "patriotic" residents of Maywood illegally took down the US flag and raised the Mexican flag over the post office. There were racist signs all over saying all European gringos need to go back to Europe. Socialist and Marxists were everywhere. There was a sea of Mexican flags and not one American flag waved by these America haters. They spit and roughed up several people in opposition to illegal immigration. This was not a fringe group. This was majority. Is this what you want????? There is no assimilation going on. This is coming to a town near you.
Your dream world utopia of a multicultural society where everybody gets along is a myth. Just because you say it is working in Switzerland doesn't mean it will work out somewhere else. The majority of Quebec wants independence from Canada. My country isn't a petrii dish for you to experiment in. I'm not ready to cross my fingers and hope it all works out for the best. Cause if it doesn't I have lost my country without one bomb bursting in air.
You fight your battle and I'll fight mine and we can meet here to debate.
BTW I'm a life long card carrying Democrat who happens to be against illegal immigration. There are millions like me.
Illegal immigration is a problem. It affects the economy in a bad way and really only benefits the elites.
Punish the people that hire illegals, and they will go home. The main reason they are here is to make money. I really doubt that these people would risk, life, limb, and imprisonment just to come here and be a problem and displace whitey.
Why would they abandon their familes and take such a big risk unless they felt that they had no choice?
As for who's in the majority and minority, it's racist to want to be in the majority, regardless of your own race. The white people who are scared of being "overrun" by Mexicans are racist. The hispanics that want as many Mexicans to come here just so they can simply be in the majority are racist (and they are out there) as well. It's racist to want to "defeat" another group.
We need to fix it so that people won't feel the need to leave their own countries just to come here. Mexico, as Thom Hartmann put it in an article, is a "dysfunctional oligarchy". Illegals send 17 billion dollars yearly back to Mexico. And their government is as right-wing, repressive, and corrupt as they come. Workers have little rights there, and their rich-poor gap is wider. The poorest people end up being the ones that come here, and Mexico is a-okay with that.
I don't want illegal immigrants here because I'm afraid of their skin color or nationality. I don't want them here because they're inadvertently screwing me as well as themselves. They're being exploited too.
Hell, I'd pick fruit if it paid well, and there's no good reason why it shouldn't. And there's no good reason why people born here can't do the work.
If you just let them come here w/o restrictions, you'll just create another underclass who will resent and be resented. We're already there in fact. THAT will divide the country moreso than it already is.
There's no need to build a fence or throw them all in jail. Just go after the illegal employers, as well as fix or do away with NAFTA and GATT, and you will solve the problem.
Were poor, uneducated and searching for a better life . . . they came to these shores to escape an oftimes tyrannical power. . . a lot like some of the immigrants today . . .
Yes, I'm talking about the pilgrims in 1620 . . . and I always find it amazing and fascinating - not to mention KNEE-SLAPPING humorous - when Netram, Richard the 36th, or other descendants of immigrants {and unless you're of Native American descent, you're the child, grandchild, great-grandchild, or great-great-etc.-grandchild of immigrants} talk as though all subsequent {read: nonwhite} immigration into this country is evil . . .
Netram, you posed the question of why its racism for whites' desire to remain the majority, yet Latino pride when Latino plan and work toward becoming the "majority minority" . . .I'd like to reverse the question and ask what is that you and Pat find so threatening about whites no longer being the majority?
"I'd like to reverse the question and ask what is that you and Pat find so threatening about whites no longer being the majority?"
It's simple. They're paranoid. They think that all non-whites are out to get them, that Mexicans will become the majority, take over the White House, take care of their own people, and screw everyone else. They're afraid that they'll become a hated minority like jews in Nazi Germany.
They're afraid that the mexicans will do the same to them as they want to do to the mexicans.
It takes one to know one...
Regardless of how you feel about Pat, he is dead on with this issue. This is not a racist issue.
The people who scare me the most are the ones who has this "I don't give a damn" attitude about illegal immigration.
Can someone explain to me why is allowing any and everybody to come here and break out laws is a good thing????? THIS IS THE ONE ISSUE THAT SHOUDLN'T BE A LIBERAL VS CONSERVATIVE ISSUE. IT SHOULD BE A COMMON SENSE ISSUE. I don't understand why wanting our laws enforced and making people do it legally is RACIST?????
I would have never thought that we would actually have a DEBATE on whether or not having illegals aliens in the country is a good or bad thing? Some things just fall under common sense.
Look, a lot of these people do not speak English and have little interest in doing so. Their kids are overcrowding public school districts. They are hurting out healthcare system. For those of you who have this "I don't give a damn attitude", it affects you too!!! The craziest thing is how the kids are automatically US citizens. You walk on the border illegally and plop a baby. Then baby is a US citizen. What the hell is happening to this country.
I have a friend that moved from Miami because of something crazy like this. I heard that they actually tried to make Spanish the official language down there.
He is talking about all non-whit immigration, just like the others here who agree with him. It's about race, not about residence status.
I am opposed to illegal immigration. I have no problem whatsoever with non-white legal immigration, and I happen to believe it should be easier to migrate here. Buchanan and friends disagree.
"Regardless of how you feel about Pat, he is dead on with this issue. This is not a racist issue. "
He may be right that illegal immigration is a bad thing. However, HE made it a racist issue by making racist comments and trying to stir up racial fears.
I will agree that this isn't an issue people should be blase about. Illegal immigration only benefits the wealthy. The rest of us, including the illegals themselves, are hurt by it.
"They're afraid that the mexicans will do the same to them as they want to do to the mexicans. "
Not necessarily. They're just scared of them and want them to go away.
'I don't give a damn attitude about illegal immigration.
Can someone explain to me why is allowing any and everyone to come here and break laws is a good thing?????" - Osiris2K5
I AGREE that illegal immagration is a problem.
I DON'T have an "I don't give a damn attitude" about it.
What I have a PROBLEM with are three things:
1} the TIMING . . . as I've said, illegal immigrants have been coming to this country for YEARS . . . why the tulmult and the shouting NOW, all of a sudden? Is this a wedge issue designed to distract us from other problems . . . like, say the mess in Iraq? I think so.
2} the COMPLAINTANTS . . . this country's first immigrants where White Europeans . . . who took over land from the Indians . . . and over the years, many more white europeans came to this country IN DROVES {including some of Pat Buchanan's forbears from Ireland} . . . I find it only hypocritical that the descendants of these Europeans who stole the land and poured in en masse during the Industrial Revolution now feel themselves qualified to say that brown people can't come in . . .
3} the METHODS . . . if these rightwingers were really concerned about illegal immigration, rather than trying to demonize Mexicans, they get at the ROOT CAUSES of why immigrating here illegally is so attractive: doing something about the companies that hire I/I's for little-to-no wages . . . and rather than band-aid solutions like building a concentration-camp fence along the US-Mexican border, why not encourage Mexico to get their shiznit in one sack, so fewer people will WANT to immigrate illegally . . . shoot, let's send them some aid: if the US is willing to spend $1 billion a month on the Iraq mess, surely we can spare some change for Mexico to make us a less attractive I/I destination, can't we?
In today's PC enironment, you can speak about immigration if you swear you are not making distinctions based upon the R word. But what that really means is that you have boxed yourself into a corner to talk about everything but the most essential aspect of national existence and the way immigration affects a nation. We suggest it is time to discuss this without the PC code. Read the rest of this article here: www.saneworks.us
Went to that site . . . another extreme rightwing, maintain-the-purity-of-the-master-race in this country organization. Right up Pat's alley.
From their website:
"SANE stands for the following:
...
-A commitment to a real border and immigration policy based on allowing only those immigrants whose culture and commitment to America's national existance will bring greater prosperity and strength to our country."
. . . Riiiight . . . "only THOSE immigrants . . ." meaning only those of a certain color, right?
But here's where they show their TRUE colors - pun intended:
"SANE's mission includes the dismantling of much of the liberal enterprise, including:
- a rejection of the Open Society agenda and multiculturalism that so dominates and permeates our society.
. . . Any world view, ideology, or -ism that promotes . . . the elimination of national existance . . . is our foe. So you can know at the start that liberalism {and libertarianism} and Islam are in our sights."
Well! Sounds like someone is advocating genocide, one-party rule, and unquestioning obedience to the Unitary Executive. Such fun!
They need to change the organization's name to "Insaneworks" . . .
This is off some site I Googled. I forgot the thread but it seems relevant to the topic. Take note of the founding fathers fears... _______________________________________________
"Colonial Attitudes toward Immigration
The Colonial attitude toward immigration was contradictory. On the one hand, the colonial leaders encouraged immigrants to come to the new world for several reasons. New immigrants could alleviate the chronic labor shortage, develop new resources, and increase the revenues of colonial government. In addition, immigrants could also help protect the colony against attacks from the French and Indians. Colonial laws were enacted to encourage immigrants to come the new colonies. Liberal land grants, the head right system, and exemption from taxes and debts made it easier for immigrants to settle in the new colonies. However, even with these needs, most of the colonies did not establish a open arms immigration policy. In most of the colonies, certain groups of immigrants were generally not welcome. The group targeted by most of the colonies were the Roman Catholics... Most of the colonies "levied discriminatory head taxes upon ship captains landing Roman Catholics, and even the colonies which attempted to promote immigration were careful to specify that only Protestants could qualify for the bounties or other inducements offered." (Jones 1960, 42) Likewise, the poor were discouraged from immigrating to the colonies and as we have seen convicted felons and convicts were not welcomed to the colonies as well.
Founding Fathers' Attitudes toward Immigrants
The founding fathers were aware of the benefits of encouraging immigrants to settle in the American colonies, but even with the benefits, many of our political leaders had their suspicions concerning immigrants. Benjamin Franklin had his concerns over the rising number of German immigrants who were pouring into Pennsylvania. He had "misgivings about Germans because of their clannishness, their little knowledge of English, the German press, and the increasing need of interpreters. Speaking of the latter he said, ‘I suppose in a few years they will also be necessary in the Assembly, to tell one-half of our legislators what the other half say.'" (Keely 1979, 9)
On July 7, 1775, the General Washington had issued a General Order that no man should be appointed a sentry who was not a ‘native of the country,’ and three days later he approved an order to the recruiting service ‘not to enlist any person who is not an American-born, unless such person has a wife and family and is a settled resident in this country.’ For service in his own military guard the General permitted only native-born Americans. He inveighed against the relatively large number of foreign officers and adventurers among his troops... (Bennett 1963, 7)
Thomas Jefferson favored immigration restriction. In 1782 he stated in part in his Notes on Virginia:
‘But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against any advantage expected form a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners? It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possible in matters which of necessity they must transact together...Yet, from such we are to expect the greatest number of immigrants. They will bring with them the principles of governments they leave, or if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as usual, from one extreme to the other. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers they will share legislation with us. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp or bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass.’ (Bennett 1963, 8)
In regards to immigration laws, the Continental Congress, under the Articles of Confederation, did not claim its authority to regulate immigration. The authority for immigration continued to be at the state level. "Under Article 4 of the Articles of Confederation adopted in 1778, the citizens of each state were made citizens of every other state, but each state retained its own naturalization and immigration laws and standards. This resulted in continued confusion and ineffective legislation concerning immigration." (Bennett 1963, 9) "
But try this one on for size. Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that we locked up our borders. Kept every one of the no good, welfare lovin, second class furriners out of our wonderful utopian country.
So then what happens a few years down the road when the world's population has doubled. What happens to our southern borders when Mexico's population adds another 100 million starving people. What are those millions of people going to do when NAFTA completes it's mission and destroys the remaining agriculture and eliminates their jobs. What do you think those folks are gonna do when the get hungry enough. How long do you think they will avoid getting angry when they see the riches we enjoy in our utopia?
If it's an invasion you fear the most, well shutting down our borders is the best way to ensure that our children or our grandchildren will face one. And at that point it will be a bloody conflict.
Folks population growth is a reality. Yes we have a lot to lose. But we can never hope to hold it by force. Sure we could hold them off for a while. Maybe even for a generation or two. But in the end we will be overrun. What we need to do today is get past the stupid short sighted policies we have today:
Turn back NAFTA - support living wages for all Latin American farm workers by stopping our subsidies for all agriculture.
Convince our fellow patriots that condoms aren't the devil's tool they've been fooled into thinking they are.
Support planned parenthood globally.
These would be a good start.