Quote:
Originally Posted by pelathais
We should have annexed Mexico when Winfield Scott was down there. I know that sounds Imperialistic - but think of the practical benefits. First of all, we wouldn't be having this argument now.
Next, half of American English vocabulary would be Spanish words. The food would be a lot better up North (Lutkefish or Tamales? No doubt! Tamales!). We'd have had a Hispanic president é or two by now. And the explotative Mexican economy would have OSHA, EPA and Reaganomic free trade to benefit from. Everybody's a winner.
And maybe ReformedDave's team could pick up a right hander so he's not sitting at home wondering what it's like to be me!  |
I wonder how many people realize a lot of "Mexicans" are technically "white"....the Spaniards, not the Indians. I also find it ironic to hear the "this land belonged to us before it did to you" from someone that looks like his family never intermarried with the indian population of Mexico...this land belonged to the Indians...many different tribes too, not just those in Mexico. Anyways, there is a lot of emotional arguments from both sides. I think it's just part of the plan. Same thing happened to Rome...one of Romes downfall was outside invaders, immigration...being a "nation" of so many different languages, nations and cultures.
I can side with the english speaking part because in the end I see that this will just divide our nation even more. Many of the illegals and legals are now NOT integrating anymore. The US is no longer the melting pot. We are a nation divided and conquored and most people don't even realize that is the case. We WILL eventually be just another unsovergn nation not just in the UN but as part of the North American Union.
It's a done deal and to blame is not the illegals that come here but powers in high places.