This kind of talk is straight out of Nazi Germany and the belief in an "Aryan" race.

http://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state- ... a6d32.html

In other words, he wants only white babies to be born, not any of color, or of a religion beyond Christianity, or from outside Western Civilization. The guy should be wearing a white sheet, not a suit.

What he have said oddly coincide with comments that frequently appears on certain Chinese nationalistic forums regarding what "should" European and American government and their people do to "save" human civilization.

On the other hand, the people of the United States have every right to steer their country and culture in any direction they please, just as every other country does.

A history lesson for you. We were told in the 1960's that we needed to make fewer babies. There were too many people in the world and not enough water, resources, etc, etc. It was a major drive to limit population growth. In large part, whites responded, blacks and latinos, not so much.

NOW, the very same people are telling us we need to open the borders to any and every indigent that wants in and limiting that in any way is RACISM. On top of that, we need to give every brown, black and yellow person, and their offspring, Affirmative Action rights meant for descendants of black slaves. Rights that put them at the front of the line for education and employment opportunities.

That crap is only going to fly so far, and I don't care what Hillis or some rude Indian thinks about that. No other country on earth is going to willingly sell its soul. Neither is this one.

mham001 wrote:

A history lesson for you. We were told in the 1960's that we needed to make fewer babies. There were too many people in the world and not enough water, resources, etc, etc. It was a major drive to limit population growth. In large part, whites responded, blacks and latinos, not so much.

NOW, the very same people are telling us we need to open the borders to any and every indigent that wants in and limiting that in any way is RACISM. On top of that, we need to give every brown, black and yellow person, and their offspring, Affirmative Action rights meant for descendants of black slaves. Rights that put them at the front of the line for education and employment opportunities.

No, NOW those are the very same people that want to "make America great again." Frequently known as baby boomers. Steve King is, surprise surprise, a member of that group.

Polot wrote:

mham001 wrote:

A history lesson for you. We were told in the 1960's that we needed to make fewer babies. There were too many people in the world and not enough water, resources, etc, etc. It was a major drive to limit population growth. In large part, whites responded, blacks and latinos, not so much.

NOW, the very same people are telling us we need to open the borders to any and every indigent that wants in and limiting that in any way is RACISM. On top of that, we need to give every brown, black and yellow person, and their offspring, Affirmative Action rights meant for descendants of black slaves. Rights that put them at the front of the line for education and employment opportunities.

No, NOW those are the very same people that want to "make America great again." Frequently known as baby boomers. Steve King is, surprise surprise, a member of that group.

They were also liberal-thinking. Pushed by private groups such as the Population Council and Planned Parenthood. John D. Rockefeller III was a major proponent and convinced the Johnson administration to officially pursue the ideology here and abroad.

It appears Steve King is not that.

mham001 wrote:

That crap is only going to fly so far.

You have to love how that Republican chairman of Iowa borrowed a worn out cliche from Obama, our strength is in our diversity, which is highly subjective, debatable, and a flat out lie in many cases. Would Chinatown be a stronger community if it had more Hispanic and white people living there? Would the military be stronger if it had more women fighting on the front lines? Would US law be stronger if we implemented some Sharia practices, just for the sake of diversity? Would the Okinawans who are known for longevity become stronger if more white people moved there and opened a bunch of Burger Kings?

Hillis wrote:

.

And despite all that blah, blah, blah, no other country on earth is willingly opening its doors, inviting all other cultures in and saying "here we are, overwhelm us, change us in any way you see fit". Well, outside of some 'guilty white' European countries.

And why should they? All other cultures are allowed their "pride", even more so once they arrive here, yet whites are told "pride" is racist, we need to step aside and give all brown, black and yellow special preference. Bullshit. ALL people have a say in their destiny - even white people. And I say this as a proud father of half-white children who will make it in this world without "special" preferences.

Hillis wrote:

This kind of talk is straight out of Nazi Germany and the belief in an "Aryan" race.

http://siouxcityjournal.com/news/state- ... a6d32.html

In other words, he wants only white babies to be born, not any of color, or of a religion beyond Christianity, or from outside Western Civilization. The guy should be wearing a white sheet, not a suit.

I can't see him referring to skin colour anywhere, all he's talking about is culture and only you are bringing race into this matter. So typical, worst racists of our days are the so called progressives.

Personally I think world doesn't need more than one baby for every married couple, no matter the religion, skin colour or whatever. Do you disagree?

Anyway, in some time there will be no more white people of western culture left on this planet because they don't reproduce anywhere near as much as people of other skin colours and cultures. Thus I wouldn't worry about non-white people when their populations are doing much better than those of white people. Hopefully you will do your part by not reproducing at all.

mham001 wrote:

Hillis wrote:

.

And despite all that blah, blah, blah, no other country on earth is willingly opening its doors, inviting all other cultures in and saying "here we are, overwhelm us, change us in any way you see fit". Well, outside of some 'guilty white' European countries.

And why should they? All other cultures are allowed their "pride", even more so once they arrive here, yet whites are told "pride" is racist, we need to step aside and give all brown, black and yellow special preference. Bullshit. ALL people have a say in their destiny - even white people. And I say this as a proud father of half-white children who will make it in this world without "special" preferences.

You just don't get it. We ARE a nation of immigrants. You seem to think this nation is for whitebread only, and no one else. Immigration isn't a weakness for us, it's a strength. It's what makes us such a great country. What does the Statue of Liberty say? "Give me your tired, your poor, your hungry, your huddled masses, yearning to be free..."?

That's what the promise of America is-to be free. To escape war. To escape political, social or religous persecution. Our Founding Fathers and their ancestors came to these shores to flee those things. Is it, in your view, only legitimate if they're white? Most of the world isn't white, and that seems to escape you.

You know, when you resort to responding "blah, blah, blah", you're beaten. By doing that you concede that 1. you're a racist, and 2. that you have no real answers to what I said. You feel this nation is for whites only. That's overwhelmingly apparent in your posts. Why not be a man, and just say that?

But you're on the wrong side of what the future will be. The white race's unchallenged dominance of this nation is over. As a white man, whose family came over here in the 1640's, I welcome that. You shudder in fear because of it.

Hillis wrote:

But you're on the wrong side of what the future will be. The white race's unchallenged dominance of this nation is over. As a white man, whose family came over here in the 1640's, I welcome that. You shudder in fear because of it.

White race will be over, not just their dominance. Stop hiding the fact you enjoy seeing people of white skin colour go extinct.

pvjin wrote:

White race will be over, not just their dominance. Stop hiding the fact you enjoy seeing people of white skin colour go extinct.

1. There is no such things as a "White Race" as something that can go extinct, the concept is not applicable to homo sapiens sapiens. We are all genetically much to close. "Race" means basically culture.
2. All "Races" will disappear once racism is gone, interbreeding will level out differeces quite quickly. A world without races seems therefore highly desireable.
Of course those will be hard time for racists, but I am sure that lot will come up with something else.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

pvjin wrote:

White race will be over, not just their dominance. Stop hiding the fact you enjoy seeing people of white skin colour go extinct.

1. There is no such things as a "White Race" as something that can go extinct, the concept is not applicable to homo sapiens sapiens. We are all genetically much to close. "Race" means basically culture.
2. All "Races" will disappear once racism is gone, interbreeding will level out differeces quite quickly. A world without races seems therefore highly desireable.
Of course those will be hard time for racists, but I am sure that lot will come up with something else.

Best regards
Thomas

1. Tell that to Hillis, he's the one who is constantly doing his best to promote the idea of race here. Personally I've always cared little about race, and a lot more about culture as a factor which truly affects our behaviour and world view.

2. I don't see why a world with as little genetic and cultural variety as possible is so desirable. I find that highly boring, and it wouldn't really solve any problems as war and short sighted thinking are part of human nature.

tommy1808 wrote:

pvjin wrote:

White race will be over, not just their dominance. Stop hiding the fact you enjoy seeing people of white skin colour go extinct.

1. There is no such things as a "White Race" as something that can go extinct, the concept is not applicable to homo sapiens sapiens. We are all genetically much to close. "Race" means basically culture.
2. All "Races" will disappear once racism is gone, interbreeding will level out differeces quite quickly. A world without races seems therefore highly desireable.
Of course those will be hard time for racists, but I am sure that lot will come up with something else.

Best regards
Thomas

I have Comrade Pvjin blocked, so I don't normally respond to him, but since he said what he did.......

It isn't a matter of enjoy, Pvjin; it's the fact that it's going to happen, and nothing can stop it. What part of that don't you understand? The white race is a large minority on this planet. Again, there are a billion people of color South of the U.S. border. Did you and white supremacists like mham001 really think that wouldn't affect the demographics of the United States at some point? It was and is inevitable.

I'm white. I've been a member of the most powerful class of person ever to walk the planet, namely a white, American male. But unlike mham001, and, seemingly yourself, i am not filled with fear or anger or hatred because the time of the white male completely dominating the political, social and economic trajectory of this nation is coming to an end. I welcome it. I think we will be a far more equal, just nation when that happens. Mham001 is scared out of his gourd about it because he feels he's better than everyone who doesn't look, talk or pray like he does.

Hillis wrote:

I'm white. I've been a member of the most powerful class of person ever to walk the planet, namely a white, American male. But unlike mham001, and, seemingly yourself, i am not filled with fear or anger or hatred because the time of the white male completely dominating the political, social and economic trajectory of this nation is coming to an end. I welcome it. I think we will be a far more equal, just nation when that happens. Mham001 is scared out of his gourd about it because he feels he's better than everyone who doesn't look, talk or pray like he does.

I don't think you will become any more equal when whites become an insignificant minority. The global capitalist elite will continue to rip poor people off. People in the US aren't really divided based on race, they are divided based on wealth like almost everywhere else on this planet. Obama isn't oppressed just because he's black, and there are loads of white males in the US who are doing very, very badly.

You fail to see people beyond their skin colour. Call me a communist all you want, but a poor white male and a poor black male in the US have a lot more in common than a rich white male and a poor white male. Money makes the real difference and people of all races are equally greedy and selfish.

pvjin wrote:

2. I don't see why a world with as little genetic and cultural variety as possible is so desirable. I find that highly boring, and it wouldn't really solve any problems as war and short sighted thinking are part of human nature.

gentically there isn´t much variation anyways and that won´t be diminished, we will see less phenotypes. That wouldn´t solve any problems, you got that right, it would be a pretty clear indication that we got rid of one problem: racism.
I don´t see how culture will be effected, since culture doesn´t present itself in our DNA.

best regards
Thomas

A backwards redneck that lives in a 95% white district, whining about foreigners, 100% in lockstep with the Trump administration. Imagine that.

Rep. King is a crazy right wing jerk, has been for years. Such talk is deeply offensive and not acceptable in modern elected officials. Maybe if we had sound immigration and foreign worker visa program for the last 30+ years and ended our deep seated racism, maybe he wouldn't have said such things.

The only racists are those that are attacking Rep. King for speaking the hard truth. The issue is culture, not race. American was not built on widely differing cultures, and it will be destroyed if we create a melting pot of radically different ones. We're already seeing this growing problem today, and it must be stopped. The only winners will be the globalist elite that are pushing it and brainwashing the population into accepting it.

The United States is a melting pot. Look at the Olympics for proof. The USA team is an example of the different races that make up America. However, there is a basic "culture" that everyone is expected to fit in to. Race isn't important. Supporting American values is important.

I must say, it is nice to see the real side of people after being on this forum for so long. I mean, we all pretty much knew it but still...

He has every right to voice his opinion. Just as I have every right to voice my opinion that this guy is on the wrong side of history. Republicans keep screaming they represent ALL Americans and "all lives matter" and so forth but these are the people who every day working Republicans put in charge.

MSPNWA wrote:

. American was not built on widely differing cultures, and it will be destroyed if we create a melting pot of radically different ones..

You mean when the letter day saints had their local religious turf wars with the rest to the point where both sides where using artillery, that was a sign of sharing one culture? Or that English basically had to be forced onto people living in the United States, because they liked still using their home languages?

And for the record, stupid ain´t a race.

best regards
Thomas

mham001 wrote:

A history lesson for you. We were told in the 1960's that we needed to make fewer babies. There were too many people in the world and not enough water, resources, etc, etc. It was a major drive to limit population growth. In large part, whites responded, blacks and latinos, not so much.

And you're actually naive to believe that THAT'S how it happened?
White people just patriotically responding to a p.s.a?

...or do you think it miiiiiiiiight have more to do with the socially-advantaged gaining first/greater access to the concepts of:

• Birth Control - kind of a big deal in the '60s ya know, not very accessible to minorities
• Fiscal planning and services - have a good next egg, you don't need as many kids to take care of you

MSPNWA wrote:

American was not built on widely differing cultures

THAT is quite possibly the single most factually ignorant (in a long litany of utterly imbecilic) things I've ever heard you say... wow.

LAX772LR wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

American was not built on widely differing cultures

THAT is quite possibly the single most factually ignorant (in a long litany of utterly imbecilic) things I've ever heard you say... wow.

Hey, this is 2017, don't you know about Alternative Facts? That's what he's referring to.

Well, since the "cultures" that came over her were from a variety of nations, after Columbus landed, he's dead wrong. My family came over in the 1640's, and were mostly English. But Germans, Spaniards, Frenchmen, Italians all came over here as well. I'm sure you'd have gotten leveled by a German if you said he was just like a Frenchman, and visa versa.

By the 1830's, and the infancy of the railroads, they came from Asia, and in that time period, Africans were being forced over here in slave ships. After the Civil War, people came from the Middle East, India, Russia, China. All kinds of lands.

MSPNWA must think all these different cultures must have shown up within his lifetime on these shores. I'll ask him the question-when did your family come over? There's a good chance that there are people from Asia who have been established here longer than your family, sonny.

There's a difference between this nation being dominated by WASP's, and being only inhabited by WASP's. What scares people like MSPNWA and mham100 is that the undisputed, 500-year reign of the WASP running this nation is coming to an end, and the other races, creeds, colors, religions, etc, are tired of being dictated to. That's what scares them.

LAX772LR wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

American was not built on widely differing cultures

THAT is quite possibly the single most factually ignorant (in a long litany of utterly imbecilic) things I've ever heard you say... wow.

Not as imbecilic to think Judeo Christian countries in Europe, (i.e, Ireland vs. Italy) which account for the majority of immigration for the FIRST 500 years (hence the term built) before America was even a nation (barring slaves imported from Africa ripped of their cultural heritage) have culture gaps as wide as between them and the largest groups coming from other parts of the world like India in the LAST 50 years.

"In 1965, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act, which did away with quotas based on nationality and allowed Americans to sponsor relatives from their countries of origin. As a result of this act and subsequent legislation, the nation experienced a shift in immigration patterns. Today, the majority of U.S. immigrants come from Asia and Latin America rather than Europe."

http://www.history.com/topics/u-s-immig ... efore-1965

afcjets wrote:

"In 1965, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act, which did away with quotas based on nationality and allowed Americans to sponsor relatives from their countries of origin. As a result of this act and subsequent legislation, the nation experienced a shift in immigration patterns. Today, the majority of U.S. immigrants come from Asia and Latin America rather than Europe."

http://www.history.com/topics/u-s-immig ... efore-1965

And THAT is why so many whites voted for Trump. Had all these immigrants been from Europe, even if they were illegal, you wouldn't hear a peep from whites, not one. But that act only hastened what was going to happen anyway, which is that more and more people of color would be coming here, staying here, and having children here. All the while, the white population, already a minority in the world, would become a bigger minority in the world. And by 2042, all that means that whites will only be a plurality, not a majority, in the United States.

And that scares people like MSPNWA, mham001, and maybe even you. You guys were fine when we whites controlled, without question, the political, social and economic direction of this nation. Now that dominance is no longer without question. It's being questioned every day, and I think that's a good thing, not a bad one.

Why do you think so many whites voted for such a foul human being like Trump? Because he talked about a time where whites dominated America. Why do you think conservatives are spending so much time trying to suppress voting by minorities? Why do you think they're trying to rewrite history books in states they control, that will downplay the slaughter of the Native American and the enslavement of the African-American? It's because they don't want to give up the power they've had for 500 years.

Despite 45's win in November, that power is no longer ironclad, and will continue to be challenged. The only way that dwindling numbers of whites can maintain that dominance would be to try and turn the U.S. into an Apartheid state.

Hillis wrote:

And THAT is why so many whites voted for Trump. Had all these immigrants been from Europe, even if they were illegal, you wouldn't hear a peep from whites, not one.

Ann Coulter believes that too, I see you two have a lot in common, you are probably both right. The reason though is immigrants fleeing from poorer nations are more likely to use welfare programs and cost US taxpayers, but most importantly because many Americans including myself do not want future Democrats permanently changing...

Hillis wrote:

the political, social and economic direction of this nation.

which can be most easily if not only achieved by importing voters. (actually the social part doesn't really bother me)

afcjets wrote:

The reason though is immigrants fleeing from poorer nations are more likely to use welfare programs

Until you realize that 1) they stay on it for a far shorter time than native-born USAmericans, and 2) they're TWICE as likely to start their own small business than native-born as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/0 ... 99719.html

afcjets wrote:

many Americans including myself do not want future Democrats

And yet you lack the mental wherewithal to figure out that your habit of being such insufferable assholes to those different than you, is what drives them to default to the Democrats/Left.

Heck, strict Muslims would be a natural fit for the GOP, especially the wealthy ones-- already believe in 99% of the same stuff, just call it different names.

LAX772LR wrote:

And yet you lack the mental wherewithal to figure out that your habit of being such insufferable assholes to those different than you, is what drives them to default to the Democrats/Left.

How many Hispanic votes did Republicans pick up in the Presidential election after Reagan granted amnesty to 3.2 million in 1986?

Approximately zero, or more accurately, negative 7 percentage points.

1980 Regan 37%
1984 Reagan 37%
1988 H. W. Bush 30%
1992 H. W Bush 25%

LAX772LR wrote:

Heck, strict Muslims would be a natural fit for the GOP, especially the wealthy ones-- already believe in 99% of the same stuff, just call it different names.

So should Mexicans, most are Christian morseo than White Americans and have strong family values and lower divorce rates too.

LAX772LR wrote:

afcjets wrote:

The reason though is immigrants fleeing from poorer nations are more likely to use welfare programs

Until you realize that 1) they stay on it for a far shorter time than native-born USAmericans, and 2) they're TWICE as likely to start their own small business than native-born as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/0 ... 99719.html

Apples to apples, please. The link you provide refers to LEGAL immigrants, and I was responding to someone who said whites elected Trump regarding regarding his position on ILLEGAL immigrants. The word fleeing should have also been a reminder that is the type of immigrant I was referring to.

afcjets wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

And yet you lack the mental wherewithal to figure out that your habit of being such insufferable assholes to those different than you, is what drives them to default to the Democrats/Left.

How many Hispanic votes did Republicans pick up in the Presidential election after Reagan granted amnesty to 3.2 million in 1986?

And you're having trouble figuring out why?
If so, then you're just exemplifying my statement above......

afcjets wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Heck, strict Muslims would be a natural fit for the GOP, especially the wealthy ones-- already believe in 99% of the same stuff, just call it different names.

So should Mexicans, most are Christian morseo than White Americans and have strong family values and lower divorce rates too.

And yet, they're not. Gee, can't imagine why.

afcjets wrote:

The word fleeing should have also been a reminder that is the type of immigrant I was referring to.

Because "fleeing" connotes legal status, huh? Interesting.

I'm sure undocumented Latinos who've fled everything from the juntas, to the cartels, to the salvatrucha guerrilla conflicts; would be thrilled to know that.

mham001 wrote:

A history lesson for you. We were told in the 1960's that we needed to make fewer babies. There were too many people in the world and not enough water, resources, etc, etc. It was a major drive to limit population growth. In large part, whites responded, blacks and latinos, not so much.

You are mixing causes and effects.
The primary reducer in birthrate was easy contraception. The Pill. A bigger TV for less than a child would cost.
A bit held back proportional to the religious background. ( i.e. Ireland and the US still have nearer 3rd world reproduction rates.)

The theory is that societies that attain some prosperity and wider education reduce their birthrates automatically.
IMU that is wrong. you need a pronounced cut in population to get out of the "reproduction takes all resources" trap.
For Europe that was provided by the 30years war. China got there via some massive famine and "One Child" afterwards.
The US settled an empty continent. India still grows. Africa... Lets not talk about Africa.

LAX772LR wrote:

afcjets wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

And yet you lack the mental wherewithal to figure out that your habit of being such insufferable assholes to those different than you, is what drives them to default to the Democrats/Left.

How many Hispanic votes did Republicans pick up in the Presidential election after Reagan granted amnesty to 3.2 million in 1986?

And you're having trouble figuring out why?
If so, then you're just exemplifying my statement above......

No, but the Left and the establishment GOP are. The Left tells the right you will never win Presidential elections without the Hispanic vote and you will never make gains there unless you soften your tone on illegal immigration and they believe it. As mentioned above, after Reagan's amnesty, the Republicans lost 7 percentage points in the next Presidential election just 2 years later.

And I am guessing you rank the man who campaigned for mass deportations, a Mexican funded border wall, and said the Mexican government was "sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people" as high on the list of Republican "insufferable assholes", yet Trump GAINS 2 percentage points of the Hispanic vote.

LAX772LR wrote:

afcjets wrote:

The word fleeing should have also been a reminder that is the type of immigrant I was referring to.

Because "fleeing" connotes legal status, huh? Interesting.

I'm sure undocumented Latinos who've fled everything from the juntas, to the cartels, to the salvatrucha guerrilla conflicts; would be thrilled to know that.

Nope, I am saying fleeing connotes ILLEGAL status. It is ironic I was unintentionally being politically correct at first by not distinguishing between illegal and legal immigration, and a liberal gets confused.

Hillis wrote:

mham001 wrote:

Hillis wrote:

.

And despite all that blah, blah, blah, no other country on earth is willingly opening its doors, inviting all other cultures in and saying "here we are, overwhelm us, change us in any way you see fit". Well, outside of some 'guilty white' European countries.

And why should they? All other cultures are allowed their "pride", even more so once they arrive here, yet whites are told "pride" is racist, we need to step aside and give all brown, black and yellow special preference. Bullshit. ALL people have a say in their destiny - even white people. And I say this as a proud father of half-white children who will make it in this world without "special" preferences.

You just don't get it. We ARE a nation of immigrants. You seem to think this nation is for whitebread only, and no one else. Immigration isn't a weakness for us, it's a strength. It's what makes us such a great country. What does the Statue of Liberty say? "Give me your tired, your poor, your hungry, your huddled masses, yearning to be free..."?

That's what the promise of America is-to be free. To escape war. To escape political, social or religous persecution. Our Founding Fathers and their ancestors came to these shores to flee those things. Is it, in your view, only legitimate if they're white? Most of the world isn't white, and that seems to escape you.

You know, when you resort to responding "blah, blah, blah", you're beaten. By doing that you concede that 1. you're a racist, and 2. that you have no real answers to what I said. You feel this nation is for whites only. That's overwhelmingly apparent in your posts. Why not be a man, and just say that?

But you're on the wrong side of what the future will be. The white race's unchallenged dominance of this nation is over. As a white man, whose family came over here in the 1640's, I welcome that. You shudder in fear because of it.

Hillis, you are a jerk who thinks your thoughts are the best thoughts and the only acceptable ones. Mham001 is quite obviously, by his testimony, in an interracial marriage and the father of biracial children. And you dare to call him a racist? What kind of fool are you?

Those of us who marry interracially are almost certainly not racists. Yet we might deplore the unsustainable population increase in the world and (eventually) in the United States. We might favor immigration for those escaping from political violence while opposing (or limiting) it in the case of people who primarily are seeking economic comfort. We simply can no longer welcome everyone as was the case with our grandparents or further back in time.

I've been wondering for some time now what you think is your purpose in life? Surely you have an agenda?

[quote="Hillis"]This kind of talk is straight out of Nazi Germany and the belief in an "Aryan" race.[...]

You aren't aware of the fact that you are a puppet doll of the far-right globalists, are you? The whole system of the Wall Street and the City is based on uneducated naive people like you.