Now you seem to be agreeing with the OP.
You just admitted that a radical group hijacked a movement and used it for its own radical purposes to the detriment of the greater movement.
Is any part of that inaccurate?
Where in Texas? There are an awful lot of Texans who speak Spanish and have a non-Anglo appearance that are simply native Texans of Hispanic descent. And what did you see exactly that made you so sure that they weren’t assimilated? And how do you have act, dress, eat, sound, worship, etc to be assimilated to this culture? I’m afraid that I might not even be assimilated yet, and I’m a white native English speaking redneck*.
The gun owning, pickup driving, beer drinking type* not the ignorant xenophobe type. 
That there is no hijack. Aztlan demands the separation of the USA of the former territories of Mexico and does have racist ideologies. Point me to the mainstream groups supporting that in the protest or shut up.
I don’t think anyone here is against Latinos in anyway. If there was a United GigoBuster College Fund, I would probably be the biggest contributor. The discussion here has little or nothing to do with the actual issues. It has to do with effectiveness and logic and reason. The thread is about the tactics themselves.
Your points are like learning about WWII and ignoring there was a WWI
I’m confused as to the point you’re making about your parents. If it’s that they were eager to become citizens and embrace the American experience, that does not surprise me. I’m sure million feel that way. And I have no doubt that those of previous generations were more eager than many in the current generation, as multiculturism was not as much in vogue.
But even granting that millions are eager to adapt and assimilate, there are many who, while not necessarily looking to resettle Aztlan, feel that they have a right to be here because it at once time belonged to Mexico. And they feel that this area of the country should rightfully be the domain of Mexican culture. Now, they are free to feel that way. And I, and others, are freee to feel that the past is ancient history and this is America, a place that should continue to be imbued with that what we consider an American culture. I have no doubt that there are millions of Latinos that
I disagree. These people are here ILLEGALLY. We have avenues for legal immigration (woefully in need of improvement) and these people are not on theat road. They did this by choice. In the meantime, there are thousands of foreigners, many of them Mexican, who have been waiting in line to come here legally. Whatever policy we have should reward the latter, not the former.
Why is this the best plan? Really? Is it because you think these people have a moral right to be here? If so, we simply disagree. If, on the other hand, it is “best” because it is the most practical, that is a different discussion. I think those who say that we can’t just round everyone up and send them back are correct. Mainly because we lack the will, but also because of the sheer logistics. But that is a problem we can seek a solution to. For instance, if there was a way to encourage these people top leave of their own volition. Going after employers in a serious way would be one effective course of action. We can discuss and debate others.
But if an “enemy” (your word, not mine) is not respectiing your laws, what are you supposed to do? How about if I start a movement that doesn’t want to abide by the tax laws? Will you give us a pass.
I think that it is important to point out in these discussions that the issue is not immigration, but illegal immigration. I am very pro-immigration. I am very anti-illegal immigration.
You’ve made this point more than once: that this was triggered by the moves in congress. But that was not the first action. The first action occured everytime someone snuck into this country or overstayed their visa. Now the U.S. is at fault here, as well. Turning a blind eye to known illegal activity for so long certainly encouraged it. And I mean both the illegals themselves and the people who hire them. Every President since Nixon(?) should be censured retroactively for allowing the problem to mushroom to the point it has reached. No, I’m not actually advocating that, just trying to make a point.
I may be wrong. Yes. We don’t know what the number is. You could be wrong in your estimation, as well. But from what I see and read and hear I come to a conclusion. That’s all I can do. And when I refer to Aztlan, I do not mean to restrict it to those groups (which I do believe to be few and fringe) that have formally declared that to be their goal. I think you would agree that there are people, outside those extremist movements, who beleive that the Mexican people have a moral claim to the territoies in question, yet do not belong to a group that is actually advocating the transfer of sovereignity.
Gigo, You and I have been in this territory before and it has gotten ugly. I wanted to thank you for your efforts in keeping things constructive and civil.
The Irish had less right to do that and I don’t think New York would ever get rid of the Saint Patrick’s celebrations. The culture they celebrate has no issue on being Americans, the point here also is that I do ignore any “domain of Mexican culture” claims, Salvadorians once bested Mexico to do to the world cup once anyways… 
(IOW not all the Hispanics are Mexicans and we are already a break to any “designs” they may allegedly have.)
Once again, an amnesty would be a reward, but this is not the case now; right now fines and other penalties are coming (if the Senate does act) that those people will have to comply before they even legalize their stay.
No, I’m only thinking what could be the best humane solution.
As I said before I’m a practical fellow.
In GD there were several flaws pointed to that approach, mainly the easy solution for employers that then will discriminate against anyone looking like a Hispanic, but I already mentioned before that I not against clamping down against employers, I just think it will be more efficient to deny their current chances to abuse illegals since many new immigrants would have now a reason to denounce their abusers.
That came from Shagnasty.
No, because the new immigrants will pay too, we did go that route before magellan01, not all crimes deserve the same punishment and once again you choose a bad example.
I’m too, the problem is that you deny the possibility of people that do see the current situation to be an inhuman one, you practically deny that those people are fighting to pass a bill to change the current situation by using the law too. It makes your “purity of law” position to be, in lights of what historically was done before, a silly position; more so since the current plan is not an amnesty, the legalization of their stay however should be accompanied then with more enforcement, it also has to be made in a way to include an incentive for all involved to discourage further illegal immigration.
Not quite, I do agree that the lack of enforcement was the fault of congress, but ever since the Amnesty of 1986 even I saw there was very little done to give incentives to both employers and immigrants to self police further illegal immigration. But even your point here is flawed, I can not remember any other countrywide protest happening before without the reason the House gave us now. Piling up criminal accusations, even against legal immigrants that for humanitarian reasons are helping illegals, is beyond the norm.
Once again, since not all of them are Mexicans, there is already a built in brake on any alleged designs they have since other Hispanic communities do look at the few examples noticed with disdain. Even so, I have to say I’m convinced you are wrong, I learned from history that Aztlan or the Chicano movemant was more prominent in the 60’s due to the Vietnam war and the counter culture, nowadays they are a shadow of what they were, even at UC Berkeley they were hard to find.
Well, thanks for that, have a good night.
You knucklehead…pull things out of context much?
I googled, and couldn’t find any evidence of previous ethnic immigrants singing our national anthem (for any duration of time) in their primary language, except for the current Spanish version that is to be released this Monday. Have at it if you feel like looking.
I ain’t the xenophobe that you claim I am (and you would know this if you read about the social services I provide to all qualifying developmentally disabled adults in my little slice of California), but I’m just wondering why in the hell would any group who is working towards inclusion, do something exclusive whether it’s singing the national anthem in a different language or using foreign flags in their protests? Totally concur with John Mace on this viewpoint. Why? Because California already strolled down this lane 12 years before with Prop 187:
That’s right…the groups who OPPOSED prop 187 acknowledged that this type of protest jeopardized the outcome they were striving for. Good thing the Federal Court stepped in and struck it down. But…WHY is everyone’s memories that short? Why aren’t the leaders of the Hispanic community pointing this out to this new generation students and protesters?
[sarcastic rant]
I guess I’m gonna have to posthumously kick both sets of my grandparent’s asses for not teaching me to sing the national anthem in German and Irish. Wifey also has to go kick her French and Spanish ancestor’s ass too for their failure in this ever so popular and blessed exchange of culture - singing foreign national anthems in your own language. :rolleyes:
[/sr]
The thing is, I have seen articles in the Hispanic press already telling protesters that, so here is another item that I notice ignorance abounds. The reality is that the current protesters do get it, in San Francisco and elsewhere I noticed the American flag is the preferred one, but I do understand when some still go with the flag of their country of origin, you can not erase your heritage:
And why is that there is no talk of any backlash when Americans do this?:
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/126886
That, by the way, is not the only incident here in Arizona. I’m not a Mexican, but for sure a backlash was coming for doing that, I have to mention that in that case no illegal or immigrant was arrested for their peaceful marching, it was one of the counter protesters that did act violent and did criminal damage who was arrested.
But OTOH yes, I do think singing foreign national anthems in your own language is silly, now if it your national anthem… well, it is still silly, but I would not stop them, freedom of expression and all that.
The protest leader is unaware that Puerto Rico is already part of the United States of America?
About the anthem in Spanish, perhaps this line in it wasn’t such a hot idea:
Representative Tom Tancredo. D’oh.
:smack:
This was on Digby this morning. Maybe it’s relevant, maybe not…
How do you know? What if the entire point is that they don’t care about America? That they are Mexican, proud of it and think America stole “their” land? Just a minor inconvienience mass immigration right?
Re: the national anthem in Spanish: it’s pretty simple, IMO, to explain the bad reaction. The whole concept plays into two big fears:
-
The idea that “immigrants don’t want to bother to assimilate at all; they just want to live like they do at home here” and
-
The idea that “immigrants are trying to take over this country,” further fanned by the media trumpeting the photos of stuff like the upside-down American flag, the “this country belongs to us” signs, the Atzlan (sp?) quotes, etc.
Uh. Because I live and work with Mexicans and I’ve never in my life every heard anyone seriously say this? Don’t they have Mexicans in Chicago? They are a lot like us, just also Mexican.
Er…they have loads of Mexican’s in Chicago. I know lots of them. Play in two soccer leagues with many of them (being Irish, as in from Ireland, I tend to do that). They don’t consider themselves American. Most are apolitical but all it will take is a few well organized radicals and all hell will break lose.
Continuing with the anecdotal evidence, most of the Mexicans I know want to stop illegal immigration.
Excuse me, folks. May I please ask for one point of accuracy? The boycotts planned for Monday, May 1st aren’t about immigrants. They’re about illegal immigrant. Speaking as a legal immigrant and a naturalized U.S. citizen, please don’t lump me in with them. Also, I keep feeling like these programs and protests are overlooking something. Not all immigrants, legal and illegal, are Mexican, or even Hispanic. Indeed, when I was growing up, the families who’d immigrated to the U.S. were from countries like England, Switzerland, Austria, and Taiwan. I couldn’t find an on-line cite for this when I looked on Friday except for one study from Rhode Island, but, in addition to Mexico, Canada, Ireland, and Poland (that from the Rhode Island study) are in the top 10 for where illegal immigrants come from.
I’m afraid I won’t be boycotting anything on Monday. I think that the House proposal which makes aiding illegal immigrants into a felony to be draconian; I also feel it’s a bit unfair to me and my family to grant instant citizenship to illegal immigrants. For once, I actually agreed with President Bush who when asked about the issue of giving illegal immigrants citizenship said, “I think they should be given a place in line. Not at the front of the line, but at the back of the line.”
As for the Spanish version of The Star-Spangled Banner, I heard a man who runs a Spanish news radio news service talking about it on NPR on Friday. He asked his listeners what they thought of it. 60% opposed it; 40% supported it, but their support tended to be a sort of, “Isn’t it nice we live in a free country where people can do whatever sort of tomfool thing they want to” support rather than the type of support which thinks something’s a great idea.
Yes and no - I know plenty of legal immigrants, or citizens/legal immigrants who have family members here illegally, who are planning to participate.
All versions of the immigration reform bills that I’ve seen so far also include significant provisions for increasing legal immigration, so the Congressional debate is quite relevant to them.
Agreed that the debate has been chock-full of (highly annoying) sound bites and has ignored much of the actual substance of the issues at hand; mudslinging is not a substitute for thoughtful policymaking. So here is some actual, you know, data for you on the undocumented population, family composition, labor force participation, etc. (Only a little more than half of undocumented people are Mexican, by the way.)
I think the people macking a ruckus about a song which has to be the most unsingable national anthem on the face of the earth anyway need to get a life.
Eva Luna, Immigration Paralegal
P.S. I think reggaeton artists participating in the recording, such as Ivy Queen (who is Puerto Rican, and may I add that Spanish has been spoken in Puerto Rico much longer than English has?), would be very surprised to learn that they are in the U.S. illegally.
In GD I made notice of an interview with one of the “radicals” that are “hijacking” the protests:
http://www.democracynow.org/print.pl?sid=06/04/21/132239
Incidentally, I do know illegals are are not doing the right thing, but I would not call them criminals, at least not yet, the protests are going on because of the efforts to make them so:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/18/D8H2G2A81.html
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0503h.asp