Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In reality you people are brainwashed functional morons who let the greed idiot GOP rich and military industrial complex getaway with murder. We are the only modern country without a living wage health care daycare paid parental leave cheap college and training great infrastructure and vacations because you are totally duped. Because freedom and communism lol. Absolutely imaginary idiocy.This mentality should not surprise anyone. Euro-Caucasians don’t generally take very well to being lorded over and ruled by a Central Government. We never have. We tend to revolt and fight back against Government oppression more than other groups.
Therefore a less Caucasian America is a more easily controlled America; which is exactly what the Democrats want.
Tax breaks aren't a handout, dumb fuck. It's your money.the wealthy flock to the republican party to get their big tax breaks. Thats their handout.
when somebody receives public services without paying their fair share for them, its a handout.Tax breaks aren't a handout, dumb fuck. It's your money.
They know which party is full of racists and won't support programs to help regular people. Living wage health care day care college great infrastructure and vacations you know the drill. No sacrifice is too great to save the greedy idiot GOP rich from paying their fair share. Only the brainwash makes it possible.They don't flock to the right because they want free handouts, and they know they aren't going to get any from Republicans.
No it is the rich's money. And Democrats don't want to raise any taxes on the regular people but rather just give them the tax breaks for a change. Tax breaks for the rich are disgusting at this point.Tax breaks aren't a handout, dumb fuck. It's your money.
What "public services" do the rich receive?when somebody receives public services without paying their fair share for them, its a handout.
No it is the rich's money. And Democrats don't want to raise any taxes on the regular people but rather just give them the tax breaks for a change. Tax breaks for the rich are disgusting at this point.
If it's their money, then it's not a handout.No it is the rich's money. And Democrats don't want to raise any taxes on the regular people but rather just give them the tax breaks for a change. Tax breaks for the rich are disgusting at this point.
Yes, we've heard your bullshit 1000 times.They know which party is full of racists and won't support programs to help regular people. Living wage health care day care college great infrastructure and vacations you know the drill. No sacrifice is too great to save the greedy idiot GOP rich from paying their fair share. Only the brainwash makes it possible.
Attorney General Robert Kennedy told House immigration subcommittee members,"With the end of discrimination due to place of birth, there will be shifts in countries other than those of northern and western Europe. Immigrants from Asia and Africa will have to compete and qualify in order to get in, quantitatively and qualitatively, which, itself will hold the numbers down. There will not be, comparatively, many Asians or Africans entering this country. .. .Since the people of Africa and Asia have very few relatives here, comparatively few could immigrate from those countries because they have no family ties in the U.S." (Congressional Record, Aug. 25, 1965, p. 21812.)
And in a letter to The New York Times, he called for repeal of the national origins system:"I would say for the Asia-Pacific Triangle it [immigration] would be approximately 5,000, Mr. Chairman, after which immigration from that source would virtually disappear; 5,000 immigrants would come the first year, but we do not expect that there would be any great influx after that." (U.S. Congress, House, 1964 hearings, p. 418.)
Senate immigration subcommittee chairman Edward Kennedy (D-MA.) reassured his colleagues and the nation with the following:"The time has come for us to insist that the quota system be replaced by the merit system...It deprives us of able immigrants whose contributions we need...It would increase the amount of authorized immigration by only a fraction." (The New York Times, Aug. 24, 1964, p. 26.)
Sen. Kennedy concluded by saying,"First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same ... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset ... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia ... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think."
In 1965, new Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach testified:"The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 1-3.)
Secretary of State Dean Rusk, when asked about the number of people from India who would want to immigrate, responded:"This bill is not designed to increase or accelerate the numbers of newcomers permitted to come to America. Indeed, this measure provides for an increase of only a small fraction in permissible immigration." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965, p.8.)
[Note: There were actually 27,859 Indian immigrants over the five years following passage of the bill, three times Secretary Rusk's predicted level. From 1965 through 1993, immigration from India totaled 558,980.]"The present estimate, based upon the best information we can get, is that there might be, say, 8,000 immigrants from India in the next five years ... I don't think we have a particular picture of a world situation where everybody is just straining to move to the United States ... There is not a general move toward the United States." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington D.C., Feb. 10, 1965, p.65.)
[Note: From 1966 to 1970, 19,399 immigrants came from Japan, more than three times Sen. Fong's estimate. Immigration from Asia as a whole has totaled 5,627,576 from 1966 to 1993. Three percent of the American population is currently of Asian birth or heritage.]"Asians represent six-tenths of 1 percent of the population of the United States ... with respect to Japan, we estimate that there will be a total for the first 5 years of some 5,391 ... the people from that part of the world will never reach 1 percent of the population .. .Our cultural pattern will never be changed as far as America is concerned." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965, pp.71, 119.)
Another rosy prediction from a supporter of the bill, Sen. Claiborne Pell (D-RI):"I am aware that this bill is more concerned with the equality of immigrants than with their numbers. It is obvious in any event that the great days of immigration have long since run their course. World population trends have changed, and changing economic and social conditions at home and abroad dictate a changing migratory pattern." (Congressional Record, August 25, 1965, p. 21793.)
The original version of the bill gave top preference to people with special skills, but that was changed in the final version to the current nepotistic emphasis on family relationship. A Washington Post editorial was no better at predicting the result than the bill's congressional supporters:"Contrary to the opinions of some of the misinformed, this legislation does not open the floodgates." (Congressional Record, Sept. 20, 1965, p. 24480.)
Even Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), who voted against the bill out of concern for overpopulation, didn't think the new preference system would mean much of a change:"The most important change, in fact, was in direction, shuffling the preference categories to give first consideration to relatives of American citizens instead of to specially skilled persons. This had more emotional appeal and, perhaps more to the point, insured that the new immigration pattern would not stray radically from the old one." (The Washington Post, Oct. 4, 1965, p. 16.)
A few of the congressmen who opposed the bill did see that the new system, even with tight labor controls, meant a drastic change."The preferences which would be established by this proposal are based, I believe, on sound reasoning and meritorious considerations, not entirely dissimilar in effect from those which underlie the national origins quotas of existing law." (Congressional Record, Sept. 17, 1965, p. 24237.)
[Note: Although immigration did increase as dramatically as Rep. Miller predicted, it took longer than he thought. By 1968 — when the law fully took effect — the 1965 level of 290,697 had increased to 454,448, "only" a 56 percent increase.]"We estimate that if the President gets his way, and the current immigration laws are repealed, the number of immigrants next year will increase threefold and in subsequent years will increase even more ... shall we, instead, look at this situation realistically and begin solving our own unemployment problems before we start tackling the world's?" (The New York Times, Sept. 8, 1964, p. 14.)
Among those who more accurately foresaw the future effects of the change in immigration law was a certain Myra C. Hacker, Vice President of the New Jersey Coalition, who testified at a Senate immigration subcommittee hearing:"What I object to is imposing no limitation insofar as areas of the earth are concerned, but saying that we are throwing the doors open and equally inviting people from the Orient, from the islands of the Pacific, from the subcontinent of Asia, from the Near East, from all of Africa, all of Europe, and all of the Western Hemisphere on exactly the same basis. I am inviting attention to the fact that this is a complete and radical departure from what has always heretofore been regarded as sound principles of immigration." (Congressional Record, Sept. 22, 1965, p. 24779.)
"In light of our 5 percent unemployment rate, our worries over the so called population explosion, and our menacingly mounting welfare costs, are we prepared to embrace so great a horde of the world's unfortunates? At the very least, the hidden mathematics of the bill should be made clear to the public so that they may tell their Congressmen how they feel about providing jobs, schools, homes, security against want, citizen education, and a brotherly welcome ... for an indeterminately enormous number of aliens from underprivileged lands."
"We should remember that people accustomed to such marginal existence in their own land will tend to live fully here, to hoard our bounteous minimum wages and our humanitarian welfare handouts ... lower our wage and living standards, disrupt our cultural patterns ..."
"Whatever may be our benevolent intent toward many people, [the bill] fails to give due consideration to the economic needs, the cultural traditions, and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 681-687.)
cis.org
The racists are all Democrats.They know which party is full of racists and won't support programs to help regular people. Living wage health care day care college great infrastructure and vacations you know the drill. No sacrifice is too great to save the greedy idiot GOP rich from paying their fair share. Only the brainwash makes it possible.
Remember Jan 6th and the trump thugs!What would the filthy Moon Bats do if the Republicans said publicly that America would a lot better off without those goddamn Negroes?
Would they burn down another 200 American cities and loot more Targets?
Small change compared to the BLM insurrections.Remember Jan 6th and the trump thugs!
Remember the six months of the Negroes rioting, burning, looting and murdering in over 200 American cities and the filthy ass Democrats bailing them out of jail??Remember Jan 6th and the trump thugs!
Ummm…evidently they are
People looking for handouts will never flock to the Republican party. Apparently you're saying is that politicians should promise handouts to minorities. The only question here is why taxpayers should ever vote for a Democrat.
Remember the six months of the Negroes rioting, burning, looting and murdering in over 200 American cities and the filthy ass Democrats bailing them out of jail??
What "progressive things?"Considering all the progressive things that Trump handed Pelosi (on a silver platter), I don't understand why so many republicans supported Trump. Like Reagan, Trump talked a good talk. But his actions were almost completely opposite of what he said.
Trump was too progressive for me.
This mentality should not surprise anyone. Euro-Caucasians don’t generally take very well to being lorded over and ruled by a Central Government. We never have. We tend to revolt and fight back against Government oppression more than other groups.
Therefore a less Caucasian America is a more easily controlled America; which is exactly what the Democrats want.
