Mexico Doesn't Apologize for Deportation

[Shelley Ronnfeldt]

For the love of humanity, let this vicious, hateful, vitriol STOP!! Where in the world are the moderators?

[alex45920]

you bet it would for some people but some ARE CHristians. All the Syrians I knew in Phoenix were Christians.

Of course there are, Brigitte. It was a rhetorical question for Mr. Giltner. The population of Syria is about 10 percent Christian. The percentage of Christians among the refugees is probably much higher than that since they are the group of people most persecuted in this civil war. Personally, I don't care what religion they practice. Neither does the pope. They need help and we need to help them. If Mexico decides to take in 10,000, then I'm all for it.

[mattoleriver]

I'm sure there must be something in there but even Google Translate can't make any sense of it!

[Guest bennie2]

obama wont take in christians. if this has changed, it is a newsflash. mexico does nor support refugees w/social programs. just letting you know. datura, cant handle a discussion? its not a sing a long its world events. use the ignore feature, or just scroll on by. i do it all the time. joco, darling just a reminder.....its not 1902. stay in the moment, if you can. unless 1902 is relevent to mexicos laws? i think not.

[giltner68]

Would it make a difference to you if you knew that a large percentage of these refugees are Christians?

And you know this how? I guess that's why the Saudis are building mosques in Germany? I did notice that Cyprus said they didn't want Muslims and I also noted there seemed to be a sudden miraculous wave of conversions from Muslim to Christian which most any missionary (like my cousin) will tell you is definitely a miracle.

[Guest bennie2]

glitner68, merkel said germany will be islamic regardless. 200 mosques built by the saudi's. they have now gotton thru the gates of vienna as well. a historical coup. they have waited since the middle ages for this moment. they are back. another 10 years, its eurasia. this is not about refugees. its a systematic muslim take over funded by the gulf states. US? maybe 20-30. 9 islamists are top players in the WH. the rest are 60s radical alinskite communists. the alliance works well. both the far left prgressives & far right fundamentalists have the same goal: to dismantle the US. (you know, the evil imperial world power). the theory is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"-@ the end of the day lets see how that works out.

[cbviajero]

obama wont take in christians

Why won't he take in Christians?

Where did you get that info?

[Guest bennie2]

cbviajero, because christians from the middle east were denied that option. its sunnie muslims who are coming in. would be nice IF the US did take some. the islamic goverments are not keen on christians & jews. they pay big $$$ to bring allah to the world. where have you been? they are killing off the christians. oh, never mind........

[Xena]

Last night when at least three different people called her on the nonsense Bennie was claiming she read in the New York Times, she posted an almost incoherent response saying she had written a long post with lots of information and links but it would not post and she lost it. She said she would redo it today. Instead, she has just been posting different nonsense.

[Guest bennie2]

xena, rather than labeling comments "nonsence", which facts/posts/comment fit that catogory? cant come up w/anything right? the NYTs did say 100,000 people may come later. bennie was correct. what do you know about islam? zero. what do you know about who is on staff in the US WH? what do you know about islamic orgs in the US? what do you know about vetting, the FBI, the people who have quit. zero. mexicos connections to gulf states? same as connections as US/europe? my vote on the last one is no the relationship is not the same. i do have other things than to redo a long post. use ignore feature.

[Xena]

Bennie, since you do not know me, you have zero idea of what I do and do not know. You now change your story about what you said the Times article said. I need only read your previous posts to know that.

You make things up or misinterpret what you read. You get called on it. You make up some excuse or ignore it. If it is not forgotten by others you make up new stuff and attack someone else as a diversion. Other people are not nearly as stupid as you think they are. You are actually quite transparent.

[Xena]

I just came across this article which I found very enlightening in relation to this and the other immigration/political threads. I think people we identify as conservative and liberal actually do see and interpret the world quite differently. The difference is important and explains why we just can not understand the others point of view.

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/29/secrets_of_the_right_wing_brain_new_study_proves_it_conservatives_see_a_different_hostile_world/

[Guest bennie2]

islamic history is what it is. nothing to see here folks eceot 1400 years of the sameold sameold. most are very outspoken about what they want to achieve. bravo, i respect that. salon is the collegedorm newspaper version of the NYTs. i can just imagine what they say about mexico or the middle east. another soros media project. xena, you cannot namecall on this board. my #s were were consistant w/the NYTs artical. no one read past the beginning, i did. again i say, please make use of the "ignore feature". if the ethnic replacement issue & political systems are so upsetting, do not read my posts. address the links to other posters.

[Xena]

I would not expect you to read something that might challenge your world view. You never disappoint, Bennie.

[Jim Bowie]

Nor do you, zena.

[Guest bennie2]

very familar w/all of soros media outlets (projects&orgs), up&down the line. have a twitter acct. as i have said numerous times, i read everything. all countries, all sides. we should be glad that chapala.com has allowed politics. the hits must be enormous. major break though for a board that was hesitant to critisize a restaurant.

[Xena]

and, I am very familiar with your sources of information too. As you would say, end of story.

[Guest bennie2]

x

[Joco]

http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

"There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/

"Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly."

"The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop." and how some people's behaviors come to be.

[AlanMexicali]

http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

"There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/

"Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly."

"The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop." and how some people's behaviors come to be.

I thought it was mainly the under educated that had these views that were propagating racism and extreme predjuices but these articles may be onto something beyond that in that a lack of intelligence is the root cause. It appears that enviroment has an influence also because more people living their whole lives or the majority of it in the Bible Belt states seem more apt to hold these views also. I also see that many of the lower end of the socioeconomic class also seem more apt to hold these extreme views.

[Joco]

I thought it was mainly the under educated that had these views that were propagating racism and extreme predjuices but these articles may be onto something beyond that in that a lack of intelligence is the root cause. It appears that enviroment has an influence also because more people living their whole lives or the majority of it in the Bible Belt states seem more apt to hold these views also. I also see that many of the lower end of the socioeconomic class also seem more apt to hold these extreme views.

Not always, but it is common, for the less intelligent to be the least educated. High intelligence will self-educate if they cannot afford a formal education. No one expects to discuss astrophysics with a Klan member.

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.” Stephen Jay Gould,

[giltner68]

Ok, since everyone loves to throw the term "racism" around like it actually means something, other than the epithet it's actually meant to be to belittle, coerce and brand the other guy, explain this to me; anthropologists classify 3, possibly 4 "races" in the entire world and that being said makes virtually all of us (I'd bet) of the same race, different ethnicities, but same race. So, that being said, explain to me how I, or you, can be racist when we want to build a wall for instance? - just exactly how does that work?

My point being the word has been over used dramatically like some schoolyard bully to brand someone we don't agree with. How about we get real and grow up? - just saying.

[Fred Habacht]

hopefully, end of story....right Susan?

[snowyco]

Ok, since everyone loves to throw the term "racism" around like it actually means something, other than the epithet it's actually meant to be to belittle, coerce and brand the other guy, explain this to me; anthropologists classify 3, possibly 4 "races" in the entire world and that being said makes virtually all of us (I'd bet) of the same race, different ethnicities, but same race. So, that being said, explain to me how I, or you, can be racist when we want to build a wall for instance? - just exactly how does that work?

My point being the word has been over used dramatically like some schoolyard bully to brand someone we don't agree with. How about we get real and grow up? - just saying.

Giltner's points are good. Calling someone a racist has frequently become just another slur, with few specific traits or details to support the intended insult.

Having said that, how do we reconcile that reality with the consequences of 35 years of intentionally hidden soft-racism. Racism in its ugliest forms does exist, prominently in the USA, as cultivated and practiced by the Dylan Roofs (South Carolina racist murderer), but is also practiced, carefully developed, crafted & cultivated by Roger Ailes, Karl Rove, and Lee Atwater throughout the 1980's, '90's, and 2,000's in the intentional forms of subtle soft-racism at the core of their very effective Southern Strategy.

As Harry Truman forcibly integrated the racist US Army, as Eisenhower forcibly integrated some schools, as Lyndon Johnson forcibly integrated formerly racist voting booths (1965 Voting Rights Act) and forcibly integrated schools and our racist work places, every one of those steps of progress simultaneously angered mildly racist white Southerners and lower-middle class blue-collar whites across the industrialized North.

Millions and millions of mildly racist white Democrats felt abandoned by their party. When Atwater, Ailes, Rove et al formulated the Southern Strategy to attract these disaffected white Democrats, they intentionally said "We can no longer use the "N****** " word. We must substitute softer code-words that will resonate with them, without openly offending people." "We must substitute "school busing" and "integration" and "welfare recipients" and "illegal immigration" in place of Ni**** and sp** ."

This intentional strategy has been recognized as "dog whistle" politics, where hard-core racists and soft-racists both automatically hear, understand and react to the 35 years of soft substitutions of buzz-words and coded-issues for nig*** and spi*. The intentional strategy of substituting code-words has been phenomenally successful in hiding racism and making it politically correct, for Donald Trump, Huckabee, et al to now openly publicly espouse racist, bigoted, and prejudiced positions that are acceptable to 50% of likely Republlican voters, couched in the soft-racist language of the 35 year old Southern Strategy.

Former Dixiecrats, current Tea Partiers, and lower-educated Northern blue-collar whites, (all who were former racist-believing Conservative Democrats), now are all pretty much all Conservative Republicans, propelling their soft-racist agendas under the guise of acceptable common speech, dominating the current Republican races.

In the face of these realities, the word "racism" is simultaneously used as broad somewhat meaningless name-calling and at the same time, racist and racism still accurately and uniquely portray a major political movement and a characterizes entirely new generations of both white and black under-educated lower-middle-class Americans.

Sometimes the words do get in the way.

[pappysmarket]

Politics, pure and simple. Where is the Mod to close this?