Dee Perez-Scott misses the Point --- Again!

The Mexican presence, though significant, is part of an even larger upsurge in the general Hispanic population in Texas and elsewhere. Dallas will become a majority Hispanic city well before 2030, when the entire state will have shifted that way. As Dallas County gained 175,000 Hispanic residents (now 35 percent of the population) from 2000 to 2005, 130,000 Anglos moved out. Hispanic illegal aliens now account for 100 percent of the county’s net population growth; in the North Texas region, it’s 40percent.

Each day at Parkland Hospital, some 32 babies of undocumented, foreign-born parents, mostly Mexican, are born into this world of woe and U.S. citizenship. That’s 75 percent of the 16,489 deliveries in fiscal 2006. Medicaid pays the bill—or at least some of it, some of the time. Parkland has to go through Kafkaesque bureaucratic hoops to get the money, as well it should. Federal guidelines limit what the hospital can bill to the government without obtaining documentation from pregnant mothers. One has to wonder how much could be saved if U.S. policy permitted the immediate repatriation of pregnant illegal aliens before they can deliver their instant citizens.

I ask you, "Does that sound like La Reconquista or not?"

It's hard to understand why anyone thinks a benign policy toward illegal aliens and their progeny is in their enlightened, long-term, best interests and those of Texas and the U.S. If the Latino culture is so great, the aliens would have remained in their homelands. Instead they come here and begin immediately to re-create the very conditions that caused them [the illegal aliens] to leave their homelands. Maybe the Democrats and the Mexican-Americans should re-think their support of illegal aliens, porous borders, ineffective enforcement, and amnesty.

Dee's response:

What you ALWAYS forget...you say "leave their homelands"..what a silly silly comments. The majority of Latino citizens in the SW states are like me. We've always been here. Our ancestors have lived here for centuries, much longer than yours. These ARE our homelands!!! We built this country with our hard work ethic, family values and our sweat and blood!

Sorry, Dee, but some of our ancesters were here in the early 1600s in what became the U.S. The number of Hispanics in this country was not nearly enough to have "built this country" as I will demonstrate with population data below.

It's strange how Dee is unable to respond without distorting what has been written by others who disagree with her. Does she have ADD? She knew that I was speaking mostly about the illegal aliens, for example the 4-500,000 in Arizona. I referred to other Hispanics only in the sense that they may wish to reconsider their view of illegals. Also, if the Hispanic citizens were born here and have never been to Mexico except for an occasional trip to a resort, then they need to acquaint themselves with Mexico today to see if that is what they would like to see the U.S. become. As the illegal aliens continue to flood across the border and soak up the funds for Medicaid and other taxpayer-funded social and educational programs, they will begin to re-create here the very conditions that caused them to leave their homelands: poverty, joblessness, oligarchy, corruption, crime, gangs, and drug, human, and weapon smugglers.

Most of those whose ancestors have been here for centuries don't fit in the illegal alien category. However, they should know by now how the conversion of the U.S. into Mexico Norte is hastened by the flood of illegals and how that conversion will adversely affect them personally. Having given this thoughtful consideration, they might want to reconsider the support they provide to illegal aliens and their causes.

Although my ancestors arrived in the U.S. less than 200 years ago, my wife's ancestors were here in the early 1600s. Later, some fought in the Revolutionary War. In terms of building this nation, they were among the first of the builders because they were not only there when the nation was founded but because many gave their lives to enable our great country to come into being and achieve its manifest destiny.

No one would have objected if Dee's statement had been,..."we ,in some small way, helped to build this country..." instead of "...we built this country...".

The census data for the first year and subsequent years in which "Hispanic" was used as a category is a useful resource to see how much or how little they contributed to the building of this country based on their relative numbers.

Even as recent as 1970, Hispanics were only 4.7% of the total U.S. population. How many of them were migrant farm workers is unknown. Therefore, at best, based on their numbers, Hispanics could only claim to have built 4.7% of the incremental changes in America during the year 1970. If we were able to go back farther, we would see even smaller numbers of Hispanics relative to the total population, so claiming that Hispanics built this country is just so much hog wash, if not an outright lie.

In Arizona, the estimates of the 1940 population show Hispanics at 20.4% and the White-Non-Hispanics (WNH) at 65.1% of the population. By 1990 the Hispanics had declined to 18.8% while the WNH had increased to 71.7%. (I assume the Hispanic count includes both citizens and illegal aliens.)

In California, in 1940, the Hispanics were 6.1% of the population and the WNH were 89.6%. In 1990, the population was 25.8% Hispanic and the 57.2% WNH. This is La Reconquista no matter how much Dee protests. Obviously, when Victor Davis Hanson wrote his book, “Mexifornia: A State of Becoming”, he knew what he was talking about. At 25.8% Hispanic, Mexifornia is a microcosm of what we can expect when the entire U.S. approaches that percentage in 2050. Mexico Norte will then be an appropriate name for the U.S. in 2050. Mexifornia is therefore a good case study of what 2050 Mexico Norte will be like.

Here's the quote from my post with appropriate emphases so no one can miss it the point this time. This would not have been necessary if Dee had not chosen to deliberately distort and misinterpret my words.

"

It's hard to understand why anyone thinks a benign policy toward illegal aliens and their progeny is in the long term best interests of either Texas or the U.S. If the Latino culture is so great, the aliens would have remained in their homelands where it is already exists. Instead they come here and begin immediately to re-create the very conditions that caused them to leave their homelands.

Everyone should be able to see that at some point more becomes less -- the more there are of us: Hispanics, Anglos, Blacks, and others, the less there will be for each of us and the more our country will resemble impoverished and overpopulated countries like Mexico. It's a mystery to me why that is so hard for some to understand and accept.

Dee Wrote:
Our ancestors have lived here for centuries, much longer than yours. These ARE our homelands!!!

I remarked, "Spoken like a true Reconquista [Reconquistadoro]! Good luck with that!"

I asked, "Do you really want to return to being a part of Mexico? Is that the culture, the economy, the mores, the disregard for the rule of law, etc. you want to be emulated and re-created in Texas?"

Dee did not answer that question.

Instead of building America, the influx of illegal aliens from south of the border more likely will end up destroying it.

The demographics in Texas are much the same as Arizona and California. Its Hispanic population increased from 12% in 1940 to 25.5% by 1990. So it may well be that some of the ancestors of that 12% were here centuries ago but certainly not the ancestors of all of them. Some of those ancestors must have been in Mexico or points south at one time in the past, so any claim that Hispanics built even the border states is totally off base and greatly exaggerated.

I Travel for JOOLS added...

I read that Mexico is building a fence across their southern border. I almost laughed out loud. At the same time, they chastise the U.S. for our feeble attempt at a fence. Now today I read several mayors from Mexican states are upset that we are deporting Mexican national criminals because those same criminals are committing heinous crimes in Mexico.

Maybe the fat cat richest man in the world who is Mexican could do something for his own country. Or maybe Mexico could exploit its own rich resources to better the living conditions for its own people. And maybe the Mexican government could spend a little money to educate its own citizens so they could get decent jobs and live a happy life in their own homeland.

But, no, Mexico doesn't do any of those things so their people flee here and expect the U.S. taxpayer to pick up the tab for their medical care, their education, their foodstamps, and their public housing. That illegal maid who was crying on national tv saying Whitman abused her even though she was paid a handsome wage of $23 an hour!!" Is it any wonder that unhypenated Americans are upset...

Dee wrote

The estimated Hispanic Citizen population of the United States as of July 1, 2009, was 48.4M; today, it is closer to 50M, making people of Hispanic origin the nation's largest ethnic or race minority. Hispanics constitute 16 percent of the nation's total population. In addition, there are approximately 4 million residents of Puerto Rico, a Caribbean U.S. territory. The US has 97 men for every 100women. However, there are 107 Hispanic men for every 100 Hispanic women.

Many celebrations are being held across the country in honor of Hispanic Heritage Month. This year, the theme of these very American celebrations is to celebrate Hispanic Heritage, Diversity, Integrity and Military Honor.

I don't know what the significance of the male to female ratio is unless it means that some Hispanic men, in the end, will be looking for Anglo, Black or Asiatic mates. I highlighted the words diversity and integrity because the influx of Hispanics in the numbers cited is reducing diversity in the U.S. It is becoming more Hispanic and that does not equate to more diversity. Hispanics and their progeny account for as many immigrants as those from the next ten countries combined.

Integrity means fidelity to moral principles like the rule of law. Therefore, there is little reason for illegal aliens to celebrate integrity since most of them are of Hispanic origins and who have ignored the rule of law. I question their personal integrity and that of their fellow travelers and supporters.

Dee said...

I doubt you UNDERSTAND the term reconquista. How dare you name call. It is repugnant and stupid.

Well, actually I do understand that term. It is an accurate description of illegal aliens and those who support them. Dee may consider the term reconquista "repugnant and stupid"because it is too close to the truth or perhaps she is calling me personally repugnant and stupid. I will make note of those words so I can remind her next time when she says she never calls people names. When she wrote that using the term "Reconquista" is stupid and repugnant name calling, it is rather obvious that she meant that admonition in a very personal way, a form of indirect name calling in and of itself.

Reconquista means "reconquest". Perhaps the word "Reconquistadoros" is more appropriate for those whose purpose is to aid and abet the reconquest of the Southwest by defending and supporting the causes of illegal aliens and standing in the way of the most effective deterrents.

Dee wrote,

As my bio states, my family has roots IN Texas prior to it becoming a state. We've been Tejanos and we became American. Our family worked hard to help Nation Build this country, serving in the military, defending this great nation of ours in War and in Peace. It is too bad people like you see Color First and DO NOT respect minorities as True Americans.

Ah, Dee, that is where you are wrong and have always been wrong. Whatever I write or have written has nothing to do with a lack of respect for minorities. I judge each individual according to his or her individual merits. That judgment has often hinged on his or her support of national boundaries, sovereignty, and the rule of law. Then there are fellow travelers who aid and abet the entry and presence of illegal aliens in the U.S. In that regard, I make no distinction based on color or minority status. If Dee thinks otherwise that is unfortunately her biases coming through loud and clear. All I ask is that Dee read my posts very carefully and draw no conclusions except those which are explicitly stated. If I have made a typo or other mistake, I am quite willing to admit them. If Dee disagrees with me, that's okay but she shouldn't expect me to agree with her position regarding illegal aliens. I regard that as a sign of disloyalty. Dee has failed time and again to properly assess the long term adverse impact on the U.S. of illegal aliens and those who support them. We need to authorize the use of the most effective measures to apprehend and repatriate illegal aliens and create the necessary deterrents to future border violations.

If she is a loyal American as she claims, why is that so hard for her to endorse?