No, I don't really think you are missing that much. I think the person you read is one of the anti-immigration extremists we've got to be careful of. I write this as about a fourth generation American (unless you go back to my Cherokee roots).

Immigration has got to be controlled. Open borders are insanity. If we had open borders, 40% of Mexicans would be here. That's not acceptable. There also has to be some reasonable limits on legal immigration because of the need for assimilation into the culture. Its expensive because of the cost to local governments indigency programs and county jails.

Whille all illegal immigrants are not criminals or using welfare, a lot end up that way. From a government perspective, I those who are here illegally need to go back and if they want to come back do it legally. I don't think we're the World's welfare state and we don't have the money to fill that role.

I think on the other hand, yes, its okay to express your heritage. There's a lot of proud heritages in this country that while Americans honor their past. There's the Sons of Norway, the Highland Games, Daughters of the British Empire, and a host of others. I think attacking someone for being proud of their heritage is itself unAmerican.
Adam Graham | Homepage | 10.03.05 - 11:06 pm | #

Josue,

Dont even bother arguing with this guy. The chip on his shoulder is huge and its not worth lowering yourself to his level.
Val Prieto | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 7:21 am | #

Wow - great article and great blog. It is people LIKE YOU that I address as examples in my last article (although I have geared more toward black Americans in this piece) which addresses racism, stereotypes and facing the blunders of political correctness and the realities of ethnic crime.

I also agree whole-heartedly with your views on immigration and multiculturalism.

Outstanding job!
Timmer | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 7:40 am | #

Val and Adam, thank you both. Thank you Timmer. I'll have to check out your blog.

Adam, you pose some interesting comments. I will need to think about my views more closely.

A fair question is should a government limit immigration (legal) through qoutas? If labor is a limited resource, and we know that free market economy is the most efficient way to alocate limited resources, how much should we be putting quotas on immigration-? (our source of low cost labor in this country.)

I do not believe we should be the world's wellfare nation. I believe every immigrant that comes should be expected to contribute, pay taxes, and work hard! Perhaps the issue to look at closer is whether it benefits our nation to limit or place quotas on immigration? I don't know yet--it's something I need to look into and learn more about.

Thank you for joining in the discussion.
Josue Sierra | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 8:04 am | #

I hardly know where to begin. First of all, though, allow me to present my bona fides. My father's branch of the family tree has been traced back to Pennsylvania in the very early 1800s; prior to that, of course, they came from Europe. But the time frame does fit your correspondent's rather narrow definition of "settlers" vs. "immigrants". Not that I have ever given much thought to the distinction. Perhaps that's because I have late 19th century Polish and Swedish immigrants to thank for my mother's side of the family.

Second -- your correspondent is in factual error. He has confined his argument to the east coast establishment of a fledgling nation from British colonies and subsequent westward migration (of settlers, naturally) while conveniently ignoring the fact that, on the west coast, the Spanish already had been established for nearly 100 years at the time the 13 original American colonies declared themselves independent. Part, or all, of present-day California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas were settled by colonists. Ranching and farming communities, under the protection of presidios, were thriving even as the first shots of the Revoluntionary War were fired back East. The Spanish Army and Navy even supported the cause of the British colonies' independence -- a fact conceded recently by no less than the NSSAR and NSDAR, who in 1998 finally began accepting for membership descendants of Spanish soldiers who had served in California during that time.

Were "los californios" American settlers? According to the definition at the site your correspondent linked, yes; the land on that side of the continent also was "tabula rasa" and the colonists intended to create a new community. Did their customs, values, and culture become so homogenized in the melting pot after those territories were ceded to the United States that their distinctiveness disappeared into the "Anglo-Protestant culture" your correspondent is so fond of, which in reality never existed? No, and thank goodness.

Your correspondent lost any credibility whatsoever with his vindictive rant against the Cuban immigrant community in which he lives; he is patently racist and an eyelash away from outwardly espousing white supremacy -- oh, excuse me, "Anglo-Protestant" superiority. You owe him nothing but a view of your backside as you walk away. His hatred of immigrants is palpable and in no way representative of the vast majority of Americans of Anglo-Protestant (or Anglo-Catholic for that matter) descent. Again, thank goodness.
Mo | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 11:14 am | #

Mo,

Great perspective into what was happening on the West coast. It ads perspective to this issue. You reasure me that this guy is an exception, a racist, and not the norm attitude among Americans.

You all, blog readers, have said it best. Blogging continues to be an amazing learning experience for me. Thank you all.
Josue Sierra | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 11:31 am | #

The very thought that there are still people with this animosity at you after declaring the obvious common-sense things you too agree with make me do a Homer-Simpson "DOH!" While most of the other commentors here have been great, some a little off topic, I'd like to stay more focused.

You have made these points:
1) legal immigration and
2) language adoption

It doesn't get any more correct than that.

I too see that Kate's Dad has some issues, and I can understand how those issues born of experience shape his opinion. That doesn't mean he's right, it just means he thinks he is right from his perspective. If he could step back maybe he would realize that his experiences appear to be with a minority of sore-heads and that by-and large the Cubano immigrants are proud Americans.

If I were to apply the reactions of a few individuals to me being out with my bi-racial daughter I would call all white and black people racist bigots. That dog just don't hunt, as my grandad would say.

Keep up the great work!
dave | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 1:46 pm | #

One problem we're left with as well, that goes beyond that. Now, if people come out with families and don't earn much money (like most immigrants do) but you have them file their taxes legally, we're presented another cost problem and that is the Earned Income Tax Credit. That's going to cost money.

Also, without being racist, if we're dealing with immigration, there is the need for assimilation and a question you have to ask is how many immigrants can be assimilated into the greater American culture at one time. The worst thing to happen is for people to be left behind which basically guarantees a cycle of dependency.
Adam Graham | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 7:26 pm | #

"the need for assimilation and a question you have to ask is how many immigrants can be assimilated into the greater American culture at one time."

Adam, it seems to me that I have a higher expectation in regards to just how many immigrants can be properly assimilated.

The problem, I think, is not so much with the immigrants themselves, but the values they are learning and aquiring from the left-leaning wingbats that tend to take on the role of "defender of the minorities."

In other words, if immigrants where provided with proper, politicaly incorrect incentives to work hard, learn English, and assimilate--proper training--I believe many would assimilate without trouble. I also believe the US would have a much higher capacity to assimilate these. Again, the problem of assimilation does not necesarily lie within immigrants themselves, but with the values being taught to them through our broken system.

So, perhaps, because our system is broken, we would have to limit legal immigration. If this is the case, then the US government would have no option but to build a big long fence--because the demand will always be there.

I'v said it before--NAFTA and CAFTA are steps in the right direction in providing an injection into Central and South American economies. These are helping reduce the need for immigration to the US--considering that economic opportunities is the number one reason people come to the US.
Josue Sierra | Homepage | 10.04.05 - 11:07 pm | #