9 Replies to “Mr Virtual President”

  1. Every time he says American or America, substitute Canadian or Canada and it would just as applicable.

  2. I think America’s first expulsion should be Jim Carry. Forget that. Don’t want him back.

  3. Oh come on now this is rational self interest common sense – NO BODY e=wh has been indoctrinated in transnational-Marxism in the pubic school system has any nationalist self preservation or self interest anymore – It’s an open boarders world now – a global village under UN masters as far as the global governance zombies are concerned.
    Common sense is not common these days do this rational perspective is wasted on the zombie wasteland the US has become.

  4. That’s why I can’t handle Bill Whittle: it sounds great, but it’s 80% wrong.
    One: What’s so bad about being anti-immigrant, legal or otherwise? So what?
    Every Irish, Jewish and Italian gangster who set up shop in the US at the turn of the century came there legally.
    How much did that wave of immigration alone cost native taxpayers over the course of decades?
    Two: Most people want to come to America today — legal or not — because they want to suck on the welfare teat. The idea that all these huddled masses are yearning to breathe free is century old sentimentality.
    Three: They also want to settle America (and Canada) and set up parallel Islamic or whatever mini-states until such time as they can take over the entire country.
    Cheap sentiment and liberal Hollywood indoctrination aside, a lousy old poem on a weird French statue is not an immigration policy.

  5. to Kathy S.
    Immigration, within the reasonable limits of what America or Canada needs. It is as long as the gov’t. is willing to see they adopt and live by that nation’s values, is an asset. Without the Latin American immigration, the U.S. population would be aging and shrinking, as would it’s economy, just as Europe is. (the Japanese problem)
    For the U.S., it’s the immigrants, who don’t want to become American that is the problem. The U.S. brought it upon themselves by choosing a birthrate below replacement. So has Canada.
    Yes, it requires immigrants, who want to and are willing to actually become American or Canadian, to become responsible citizens. That should be part of the criteria.
    True, until we re-instate that almost forgotten that principle, we make the mistake that European nations have made, and which may indeed cost them their sovereignty and nationhood.
    Yes, until then our current immigration policy serves to weaken the formerly more free and democratic nation of Canada, too.
    Controlling criminal activities among immigrant populations needs a period of time, say 5-7 years before they are granted citizenship.
    Most criminals will engage in illegal activity within that period, and can thus be deported before becoming citizens. Currently, the wait in Canada is only 3 years. That is too short, and one reason why we’re accumulating international crime syndicates and Jihadis.
    That 19th/20th Century wave of European immigration was largely positive. The minority which were immigrant criminals became a problem only when they were allowed to stay and enter politics.
    How long the northeastern U.S. politics have been corrupt, is a good question?
    How long has Montreal politics been corrupt, is another one?
    Did it pre-date that wave of immigration? Was that why it thrived and continues to do so?
    As for large scale immigration from Muslim countries, yes it’s a serious mistake. Prof. Salim Mansur, an Ismaili (the moderates who integrate/assimilate well and are much persecuted by the others) publicly advocates halting immigration from those countries to protect liberal democracy.
    CISIS and the RCMP can root out most terrorist activities as long as the Muslim population is relatively small, but are helpless against Stealth Jihad.
    Notable, is that Toronto police arrested someone recently who staged a demonstration against Islam’s orthodox view of women as a lower, second class of person. Yes, we’re in danger. It’s growing, and in more than just Toronto.
    Yes, the current Harper Conservative policy imitates Europe’s errors.
    On the other hand, it is to our benefit to accept the Christian and Jewish refugees fleeing Islamist persecution. They alert us to the impending danger, just as refugees from Iron Curtain countries did to that menace.

  6. So how do we determine who want to become a responsible citizen. Just ask them? Of course they’ll lie.
    I’m not convinced that a shrinking population is a bad thing or that it leads to a “shrinking economy.”
    I certainly don’t think for a moment that any “growth” the US may be experience is worth the colossal negatives they’re experiencing through “Latin American immigration.”
    Immigration would be fine if we eliminated, completely, the welfare state. As long as a vestige of it remains, it will attract the bad with the good.
    Are you being sarcastic when you assert that immigrant criminals were only a problem when they entered politics, (like the Kennedys)? Tell that to everyone killed by organized crime, or whose business was destroyed.

  9. Being a responsible citizen was an expectation for immigrants. Also, it used to be part of the social pressure.
    A self-confident culture is efficient at doing that. We re-acquire that soon or we’ll perish in conflict and tribalism.
    The ethnic enclave phenomena is a major problem, for us, the U.S.A. and Europe.
    Government policy now the numbers are much too high. This has exceeded Canada’s ability to assimilate them. The more different the culture of the immigrant, the more difficult and more time is required for assimilation.
    Hence, Prof. Salim Mansur’s remarkable testimony advocating halting immigration from Muslim countries before the Senate Committee on Immigration.
    The economic question is a good one, if a population increases it’s productivity, think of Israel, could an economy be dynamic enough? I think so, but I’m not an economist.
    Japan has been managing for a couple of decades or more with an aging and shrinking population. Can that be sustainable, likely only in the short term.
    The U.S. problem with Latin American immigration is two fold; the numbers are too high, too fast, and they’ve given up or greatly weakened the social and political pressure to assimilate.
    The U.S. needs to round up the criminal element, and also, those who aren’t trying to integrate by improving their education and job skills and deport them.
    Then the social support network the problem element subsists on would dry up.
    Immigrants who do believe in American exceptionalism can assimilate, others shouldn’t be getting citizenship.
    V.D.H. notes that 30% of U.S. welfare cases are in California. That is so stupid, it’s insane. That and the money sent out of the country is dragging the state towards bankruptcy.
    The Muslim immigrant problem in Europe is doing the same thing. Many of them view social welfare as jizya. That is no way to get them to integrate or assimilate.
    A social welfare system works so long as the percentage of the population on it is small and also shrinks as the economy expands.
    Providing a criminal subculture the same level of benefits, as those who aren’t, ends up subsidizing that criminal subculture.
    That is a mistake you see in the Toronto housing projects, among the aboriginal populations and among the European Muslim subculture segments committing crime there.
    Yes, of course the immigrant/ethnic base criminal element is a problem. The point I was trying to make is that political corruption prevented it being effectively dealt with.
    As far as I know the Kennedy clan’s problem wasn’t how they originally became wealthy but the political irresponsibility that sometimes follows inherited wealth or mistaking Utopian-ism for reality.
    The legal system is one factor, but the other necessary factor is that a criminal subculture should be a source of shame to the culture that supports it. We’re lacking that.
    For example, in the prairies, a high rate of aboriginal crime is a major problem. If and when the aboriginal leadership and community start to treat that as shameful and withdraw social support for it. Without that it would shrink to manageable levels. It won’t until then.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation