State of the Union Address 2019

[churchmouse]

Absolutely no disputing going on here! I teach in one of those schools on the SE side, and see this happening more as time goes by. I don't even want to know which kids are here legally and which are not. But that's kind of my whole point about legal immigration--the folks who come here legally, who work for it to happen, seem to by and large NOT be the leeches who suck down all the free this, reduced that kind of stuff that comes as .gov handouts. I would MUCH rather have folks around me who wanted to come here to work for a new life instead of those here to abuse our system and drain my tax $$ down the toilet. And I've always said that if my grandpa could come here, learn english, start a family, work for every cent he got LEGALLY, what makes all the freeloaders today so special??? Why can't THEY do the same things? I'm all for any .gov program that encourages/enforces this.

Bingo.
In this group we have met some very nice family oriented people. But man these butt heads can not drive for ****.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Thank you! I knew I wasn't the only one. I personally, uber qualified immigrant or not, think there is the possibly of having a real "crisis of culture," if you allow it to be diluted too much due to immigration.

I'm sort of surprised that some of you are treating this speech as something other than political theater. Trump said the things he needed to say to get as many Americans as possible to agree with his goals and to publicly demonstrate his willingness to work "with the other side."

As to his immigration statements: what would one expect him to say? What good would it do - as far as winning converts to his position - to agree with the notion that immigration should be shut down in order to allow current immigrants time to integrate with American society (as was done between 192_ to 1954, IIRC)? Instead of his opponents being unable to argue successfully that he hates immigrants, especially "people of color", they'd be able to point to his racism, sexism, etc, etc. for wanting to keep PoCs out of the country. Totally counterproductive.

I didn't watch the speech, mainly because I don't need or want to be told what is going to be said; listen to the speech; then be told what was said by some idiot who has a blatant agenda other than producing "news." So I read his speech on Wednesday and it impressed me. Especially since the Left went batS**T nuts over it.

The further we go into this Presidential Administration, it seems to me, a more definitive dividing line between those who advocate for freedom and limited government and those who want more government interference and control over our lives is becoming more and more clear to Americans. I think it's going to be educational to see how things work out.

 

[Mongo59]

I think we need immigrants.
But... there shouldn't be such an overwhelming amount they won't assimilate.
And, they should go through the legal hoops.

But we all agree to exempt the left handed, redheaded, green eyed nymphomaniacs. They can come in any quantity...

 

[actaeon277]

But we all agree to exempt the left handed, redheaded, green eyed nymphomaniacs. They can come in any quantity...

Those are probably the ones we should beware of. At least in my experience.

 

[2A_Tom]

Bragging and complaining.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

But we all agree to exempt the left handed, redheaded, green eyed nymphomaniacs. They can come in any quantity...

So its an Irish lass for the win, don't fret they are all ambidextrous.

 

[Mongo59]

Those are probably the ones we should beware of. At least in my experience.

But isn't it what the Spartan's called, "a beautiful death"?

 

[jamil]

About immigrants and assimilation. In the past, the families of immigrants were mostly assimilated by the 3rd generation. So a grandchild of a direct immigrant would grow up “Amrican”. But those were primarily from Europe.

Immigrants who look physically different have an extra problem to solve. It is a human nature to be suspicious and unwelcoming of people who are different. Generations of cultural and language assimilation solve this problem for people who look the same. But for the people who look different, it’s harder.

Mexicans also have a proud and deep familial culture. Which might make them slower to assimilate. But some have a pronounced physical difference which tens to help isolate them. Partly because they want to be around people who look like them, and partly because white Americans tend to be the same way.

There’s been a bit of controversy about the metephores of the melting pot vs a salad. Progressives who think they’re being “tolerant” don’t like assimilation because they think each (nonwhite) culture should be preserved, and that everyone should accept every cultural and even language difference. So they say a salad metophore is a better model.

In a racially homogeneous society, it’s not realistic. Cultures will blend as immigrants live and adapt to their new surroundings. They’ll go to school with, work with, and intermarry between cultures. The melting pot is a discription of the phenomenon, not prescription fornwhat it should be.

But the salad analogy is truer with multi-racial immigration. They may go to school together and work together, but not as integrally as immigrants of the majority race. And especially important is they they tend to intermarry less. They don’t tend to assimilate cultures as easily.

I’m not saying that we should’t have such immigration. I’m just saying why some cultures may not assimilate as quickly as same-race immigrants do. Not caring about race and physics differences would gona long way solve that. But progressives can’t not care about race. They take college courses to learn how to care about nothing else.

 

[Mongo59]

Yes, but why is it "they" believe all races deserve to be preserved other than the predominant one? I may be wrong here but to me it looks like anything to be required of themselves = salad, anything required of others = fondue.

It should be one or the other but we know you can't say the word "white" out loud without repercussions, so it seems they have chosen the playing ground and refuse to let anyone but "like minded" either play or practice.

It's a double edged sword and one that should not be used in exclusivity but a blind man can see it attempted to be wielded as such daily.

I am not an "us v them" kind of guy, I'm more of a "we" (but I need as much growth as I can glean in this subject) but I do ask for a level playing field...

 

[churchmouse]

Yes, but why is it "they" believe all races deserve to be preserved other than the predominant one? I may be wrong here but to me it looks like anything to be required of themselves = salad, anything required of others = fondue.

It should be one or the other but we know you can't say the word "white" out loud without repercussions, so it seems they have chosen the playing ground and refuse to let anyone but "like minded" either play or practice.

It's a double edged sword and one that should not be used in exclusivity but a blind man can see it attempted to be wielded as such daily.

I am not an "us v them" kind of guy, I'm more of a "we" (but I need as much growth as I can glean in this subject) but I do ask for a level playing field...

There is a level playing field but it is theirs. Not what we envision.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yes, but why is it "they" believe all races deserve to be preserved other than the predominant one? I may be wrong here but to me it looks like anything to be required of themselves = salad, anything required of others = fondue.

It should be one or the other but we know you can't say the word "white" out loud without repercussions, so it seems they have chosen the playing ground and refuse to let anyone but "like minded" either play or practice.

It's a double edged sword and one that should not be used in exclusivity but a blind man can see it attempted to be wielded as such daily.

I am not an "us v them" kind of guy, I'm more of a "we" (but I need as much growth as I can glean in this subject) but I do ask for a level playing field...

In what ways is it not being "preserved"? And who is the "they" that is not keen on preserving, like "they" are to the other non-"pre-dominant"s.

 

[jamil]

Yes, but why is it "they" believe all races deserve to be preserved other than the predominant one? I may be wrong here but to me it looks like anything to be required of themselves = salad, anything required of others = fondue.

It should be one or the other but we know you can't say the word "white" out loud without repercussions, so it seems they have chosen the playing ground and refuse to let anyone but "like minded" either play or practice.

It's a double edged sword and one that should not be used in exclusivity but a blind man can see it attempted to be wielded as such daily.

I am not an "us v them" kind of guy, I'm more of a "we" (but I need as much growth as I can glean in this subject) but I do ask for a level playing field...

I was just explaining what I think is the reality of it. So it's descriptive rather than prescriptive. But, progressives use it prescriptively, which is what I think you're saying.

BTW I'm a "me" and "mine" sort of guy. Individualist. Mostly. But maybe a (rhetorical) "you" when "you" are not crazy or flat out wrong. For example, AOC is not in my tribe.

 

[jamil]

In what ways is it not being "preserved"? And who is the "they" that is not keen on preserving, like "they" are to the other non-"pre-dominant"s.

I think he's referring to the bat **** crazy progressive who say white people should all die. By definition, dying is not preserving. Plus, you can't deny that the far left is trying to erase any sign of what they perceive as "whiteness". For example, the enlightenment is now considered "whiteness". Physical science is curiously "whiteness".

 

[Kutnupe14]

I think he's referring to the bat **** crazy progressive who say white people should all die. By definition, dying is not preserving. Plus, you can't deny that the far left is trying to erase any sign of what they perceive as "whiteness". For example, the enlightenment is now considered "whiteness". Physical science is curiously "whiteness".

You're the first person who I've heard say enlightenment and physical science are "white" things. But obviously they're not. And as far as bat **** crazy progressives, well, they're bat **** crazy. One should not confuse being "vocal" with being the voice of the majority.

 

[BugI02]

Perhaps you should look at the first few pages of a Google search using the term "the enlightenment is a white thing". All the usual 'woke' sources chime in

 

[jamil]

You're the first person who I've heard say enlightenment and physical science are "white" things. But obviously they're not. And as far as bat **** crazy progressives, well, they're bat **** crazy. One should not confuse being "vocal" with being the voice of the majority.

Oh. You’ve never heard that enlightenment and science is “white”? Dude, you obviously don’t twitter.

The bat**** crazies. They’re not the voice of the majority. They’re the voice in media, the voice in universities, and they’re becoming a voice in boardrooms. Do not think that they have no power. They are surprisingly well funded and powerful. They’re a much bigger threat than the alt-right, which has mostly admitted defeat after only 25 people showed up to the 2nd anual unite the right rally.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Oh. You’ve never heard that enlightenment and science is “white”? Dude, you obviously don’t twitter.

The bat**** crazies. They’re not the voice of the majority. They’re the voice in media, the voice in universities, and they’re becoming a voice in boardrooms. Do not think that they have no power. They are surprisingly well funded and powerful. They’re a much bigger threat than the alt-right, which has mostly admitted defeat after only 25 people showed up to the 2nd anual unite the right rally.

I do not

 

[jamil]

I do not

I don’t like twitter. It’s a cesspool of rudly expressed conflicting views. But it’s a glimps of the future and therefore useful to watch. It’s what people dare say when they think there are no consequences.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

I don’t like twitter. It’s a cesspool of rudly expressed conflicting views. But it’s a glimps of the future and therefore useful to watch. It’s what people dare say when they think there are no consequences.

I've always wondered if the internet, in whole, isn't the most accurate representation of the human psyche: Wanting to believe it's all about what's productive, positive, and honorable; but in reality being preoccupied with sex, money, and gossip, and a million other ways to waste time.

Speaking of wasting time, I'm supposed to be doing my taxes right now, but I'm on INGO because I got tired of scrolling through "Funny GIFs".

 

[OakRiver]

In what ways is it not being "preserved"? And who is the "they" that is not keen on preserving, like "they" are to the other non-"pre-dominant"s.

You just stated that you were concerned about "a real "crisis of culture," if you allow it to be diluted too much due to immigration.". So what would immigration prevent from being "preserved"?

Now that you are back asking clarifying questions, as you objected to my doing so, perhaps you can provide nuance to your earlier statement;
"I personally, uber qualified immigrant or not, think there is the possibly of having a real "crisis of culture," if you allow it to be diluted too much due to immigration."
As on its face this appears to promote a homogenous, less diverse culture.