January 15, 2013

Conquistador-American and Slavetrader-American near a deal over immigration

From the Washington Post:
White House sounds hopeful on immigration
David Nakamura and Felicia Sonmez 
President Obama has promised that immigration reform is at the top of his second-term agenda, and his spokesman says proposals from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) “bode well for a productive, bipartisan debate.”


Luke Lea said...

If amnesty takes priority over e-verify enforcement in the years to come then this is a non-starter, at least in my book. I hope Obama doesn't claim his deportation record over the recent past plus a slowdown in the flow illegals from south of the border due to the recession isn't sufficient to establish his bona fides on the issue of enforcement in the years and decades ahead.

Anonymous said...

One thing that Rubio has over George P. Bush is that he looks much cleaner than George P. Bush. Rubio's skin is fair and clean looking, whereas George P. has the whole oily olive-skin thing going on. It's one thing to have a nice, dark tan, but George P. just looks too greasy.

Anonymous said...

George P. Bush doesn't need to do a Sammy Sosa and bleach his skin, but he should powder his face before public appearances, like TV anchors do, to reduce the shine.

Anonymous said...

I assume that "Slaveseller-American" is a reference to Obama's African ancestry. Since Obama's African ancestors lived in East Africa, it is unlikely that they sold captives to the Atlantic slave merchants. However, Obama is descended from American white slave-owners on his mother's side.

stari_momak said...

Slavesller-American? I gotta say I think that is a bit of a reach.

Anonymous said...

Since Obama's African ancestors lived in East Africa, it is unlikely that they sold captives to the Atlantic slave merchants.

They did sell them to Arab slave merchants, though.

Anonymous said...

"Slavesller-American? I gotta say I think that is a bit of a reach."

How about American-African?

Garland said...

Story brought to you by Nakamura & Sanchez. Any actual Americans accidentally listening, don't worry, we got this, relax and go hit the links or something.

Garland said...

What's with all the TAC commenters. Obama's maternal ancestors were american slavedrivers and his paternal ancestors sold black slaves to the arabs.

Anonymous said...

The headline should more acurately read :

" The infallibly erroneous globalists at the WSJ and 'The Economist' once again pull the right strings and destroy America".

I realise that is totally unpunchy and probably ungrammatical, but as the *real* truth behind the bullshit, a truer explanation will never be found.

Bob Arctor said...

Garland, it's much worse than that; it's "Sonmez." Her real name is probably Filiz Sonmez - she's a Muslim Turk.

Anonymous said...

Sadly, no word from American-Americans.

Anonymous said...

“bode well for a productive, bipartisan debate.”
kind of like those 'dialogues on race' right?

Bipartisan - the only thing missing is the will of the American people.

Dr Van Nostrand said...

To be sure light skinned blacks tend to be race hustlers such as Obama,Malcom X, Jesse Jackson,Valeri Jarret and those MSNBC tools. While really black dudes like Herman Cain,Clarence Thomas,Thomas Sowell,Walter Williams, and Allen West are if not conservative are usually centrist Democrats.

Exceptions of course- Colin Powell who was always a RINO and furthermore despite his support for Obama for being black ,also reveres his Scottish background.Back in 2003 he requested and recieved a Scottish coat of arms.

As well as Condoleeza Rice(another RINO) who took Bushs considerable political capital and national security credibility and wrecked it.


Conquistador Americans (with exception of Cubans) are present in all political parties it seems.In this they share a smart strategy with Israel lobbyists.
Something blacks are unwilling or unable(?) to emulate.

Dr Van Nostrand said...

Since Obama's African ancestors lived in East Africa, it is unlikely that they sold captives to the Atlantic slave merchants.

They did sell them to Arab slave merchants, though."

Arent the Hussain Obama clan descended from Africanized Arab slavers themselves?

Mr. Anon said...

Given that this amnesty drive is gearing up amidst a national "conversation" on gun-control, I detect the odor of a compromise in the works: The Republicans will roll over on amnesty in exchange for not completely eviscerating the second amendment.

Hacienda said...

The Economist is behind all this? Payback for 1776, obviously.

Anonymous said...

No more Repubs in da White House...

Anonymous said...


universal aristocracy

Anonymous said...


envahir le monde. inviter le monde entier.

Anonymous said...

David Nakamura, Oy vey!!!


The Former Council on Foreign Relations fellow loved writing about all the yummy insanely expensive Japanese cuisine he sampled while on the globalist plutocrat dime.

Last year at this time Nakamura was the Obama admin's favorite lapdog/attack dog against what for a brief moment was a prime example of what the left sees as whiny white privilege. Remember Jennifer Wedel? The brave spouse who last year surprised the Dear Leader with her question at a town hall concerning for her family's well being given that her husband Darin was a long term unemployed engineer at a time when Obama was calling for a massive increase in the H1-B and Green Cards stapled to every STEM diploma?

Here is how Nakamura sucked up to Jay Carney at the White House press conference the next day.


From Roy Beck at NumbersUSA:

I don't know if the reporter was trying to be provocative, doesn't know what "xenophobia" means or was just part of a general media cluelessness that immigration affects labor market issues, but this was the question:

The woman who talked about sending a résumé said that her husband was out of work -- and she blamed it on the fact that the administration -- rules regarding the H1B visa were too lenient and too many foreigners were taking the jobs that maybe her husband would be able to get.

Today the President, I think in his bill that he sent over to Congress, talked about maybe loosening the cap on immigration from certain countries to attract more skilled laborers. And I think his response to her indicated he believes, in fact, that in some fields there’s a shortage of qualified folks and we need to attract the skilled laborers from overseas.

My question, generally, is: Is the President concerned that there might be a feeling of xenophobia or something going on out there when the economy is this tight and there are some concerns that reflect in that question from the woman?

-- Question from White House Press Corps

stari_momak said...

"Story brought to you by Nakamura & Sanchez."

As a SoCal native of a certain age, I am actually nostalgic for Japanese-Americans. They used to be the largest Asian-American group, and were quite noticeable as a community. They used to own a lot of the land in the county my 'from back east' parents settled in. A pretty unique community overall. Being erased by assimilation (huge outmarriage rates) and immigration (the recently arrived Chinese vastly
outnumber them now). In fact, the Japanese Americans I know personally are just about as fed up with immigration as the 'Anglos'.

Anonymous said...

Jews own all.
Jews play on 'white guilt' about slavery because it's tied to 'white guilt' about the Holocaust.

If whites were to one day lose their guilt over slavery, the implication is they may also lose their guilt over the Holocaust, in which case whites will challenge Jewish power. Jews don't want that. Jews want to permanently institutionalize and eternalize white guilt so that whites will never even think of challenging Jewish power.
This explains the paradox of why, as history moves further away from past slavery and WWII, we feel more guilty about them. People 100 yrs ago should have felt more guilt about slavery since they were historically closer to the time of slavery. And as we move further away from the past, we should feel less guilt about the past. But the more we move away from the past, the more we move toward even more 'white guilt'.

Time weakens historical memory, but spirituality works differently. If something is spiritualized, it can gain power as time passes. Take the Jesus story. As Jesus story was spiritualized, it grew in power as time passed. It wasn't seen as a past even in history but as an eternal mythology.
Same thing has been done with slavery and holocaust. They have been altered from historical events to mythological eternals. Movies and TV shows and commemorations and etc have made them part of our spiritual life. Generation after generation are made to read TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD like the little red book. GREEN MILE is like holy religion to many saps.

Why did this happen? Jews control the media and academia and entertainment and government. Through such institutions, Jews have spiritualized certain things of history. So, we have DJANGO UNCHAINED which would have us believe that slavery took place yesterday and so hipster blacks today have a right to kill 'racists'. Jews release DU on Christmas day. This is how much contempt Jews feel for us.

The only way to change what's happening all around us is to change the Jews. Jews have the power, and so, if Jews were to stop pushing anti-white policies, things can change for the better.
But why should Jews stop pushing anti-white policies when they hate white folks?

The only way to push Jews to the right is by antisemitizing the left. Clever white rightists should join leftism--at least nominally--and steer the left toward anti-Zionism, anti-Jewish-Wall-Street-ism, anti-Jewish-privilege-ism, anti-Jewish-greed, and etc.
Once the left becomes very antisemitic, Jews will be compelled to turn to the right.
It's like many Jews used to be pro-Soviet-Union. They saw the USSR as a bastion of Jewish power and influence. But when USSR turned antisemitic, most American Jews turned against it.

So, what must be done is to turn the American Left and People of Color toward anti-semitism. Since Jews are so rich and powerful, this can be done.
So, all white rightists should join the left and spread antisemitic messages among the progressives, egalitarians, and people of colorites. Since Jews tell browns to hate whites, we should tell browns to hate Jews who got all the power. It's not yanquis that rule American but Los Judez.
When the American Left fumes at Jews, many more powerful Jews will turn to the right.
And then, Jews will stop with the anti-white hatred as they'll need white conservatives as allies against the antisemitic left.

Anonymous said...

Where Fukuyama was most wrong about end of history.

He said liberal democracy triumphed. He might have been right--at least for the West and maybe East--if the West were to remain mostly white and if most people(especially the powerful)were genuinely committed to liberal ideals.

But as the West is filling up with third world tards, liberal values will crumble. The idea that the West can remain meaningfully liberal with tons of non-whites(especially Africans and Muslims) is too funny. Indeed, the problem of liberalism is its openness and cult of tolerance lead to the admission of too much decadence and suicidal tendencies. Liberalism is bound to undermine itself.

Also, the most liberal people that control the West are not really committed to liberalism. yes, the Jews. For Jews, liberalism is a ploy, a tactic, a strategy. It's not a principle. Jews are really motivated by tribalism and their own supremacism. Notice how Jews will push all manner of legal and social policies to censor free speech and spread lies just to expand and preserve their power. If Jews are really liberal, why are they so fanatical about silencing and blacklisting people they disagree with?

That was Fuku's main blindspot. He failed to see that liberal Jews are really agents for Jewish tribalism.
Look at US and EU today and the national policies of both worlds are subordinate to Jewish financial, political, and foreign policy interests.
It's the bend of history, not the end.

Pat Boyle said...

I have a question. A hypothetical question.

What if your guy Antonio Villaraigosa were arrested for a violent crime? Given his biography that's not all that preposterous. My question is - as what race would he be classified on the arrest record?

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics definitions there are exactly three races (and other) and two ethnic groups. The races are white, black, and Asian. The ethnic groups are Hispanic and Non-Hispanic.

Villaraigosa is the son of Mexicans - one an immigrant and one an American. He identifies with Chicano action groups. He seems to be racially and ethnically a very mainstream Hispanic American from Mexico.

I read that Mexico considers 9% of Mexicans to be white, 30% to be indigenous, and the remainder to be mixed. A recent government haplotype study determined that 65% of Mexicans are 65% indigenous and 35% non-indigenous. Non-indigenous includes Europeans, blacks and Asians.

So it would seem that your mayor as a person from a mainstream Mexican background should be classified as Amerindian-Hispanic. The argument would be that this is the closest category of those allowed. Indigenous means Indian. Mexico says that the largest racial component in their population is Amerindian.

The problem is that I think he would actually be classified as White-Hispanic by most officers. I can find no source on the web that reports on the practices of cops on the beat with regard to the classification of Chicanos. But in the crime statistics for murders the American Indian proportion of the total is less than 1.5%. Those other data sources that include the Hispanic category count Hispanics at 12.3% of the population. This argues strongly I think that Mexicans are routinely classified as white not Amerindian.

The reason that this is important is because the FBI reports violent crime as only White, Black, Asian/Island, and other. Many of the illegal aliens in Southern California I fear are classified as white.

In 1991 violent crime peaked in the US. At that time blacks committed more than seven times as many murders and other violent crimes as whites. But today we have less street violence and the black rate is only six times as great as the white. Does this mean that the racial gap is closing? Is this good news?

Or is it just that now Hispanics especially illegals commit a greater proportion of these kind of crimes and they are being classified as whites?

Is Villaraigosa a white man or an Indian? No other choices are allowed.


Anonymous said...

"Since Obama's African ancestors lived in East Africa, it is unlikely that they sold captives to the Atlantic slave merchants."

His white ancestors had slaves too.

The thing is blacks don't profess their guilt about slavery whereas whites do. So, whites are stuck with the guilt.

The rule of history. Never say you're guilty of anything. No one appreciates you as a good conscientious redemptive person. They just see you as a sucker and sap to exploit.

ATBOTL said...

"Arent the Hussain Obama clan descended from Africanized Arab slavers themselves?"

No, they are descended from people who share far less recent common ancestry with Caucasians than even West Africans and Bantus do. The Nilo-Saharan speaking peoples are old Africans. Most black Africans today are a hybrid of these types and people who were closely related to those who migrated to Eurasia, with some backflow.

Anon87 said...

Re: Sammy Sosa.

He has a new, apparently legitimate, Pinterest page. His skin looks like most people remember. Does bleaching "wear off", or was it all just tricks of lighting and photography?

Anonymous said...

"Never say your guilty of anything".

Its interesting to contrast the Turks with regards to Armenians and Germans with Jews. Likewise Japan feels no guilt for its terrible crimes in Asia and the Pacific from 1931-45. I also doubt the Spanish get choked up about the Aztecs or the Incas.

I guess some peoples are more susceptible to guilt then others are. Then again Jews pretty much control Hollywood and the media so they make sure their sob-story never gets forgotten about.

Anonymous said...

Its interesting to contrast the Turks with regards to Armenians and Germans with Jews. Likewise Japan feels no guilt for its terrible crimes in Asia and the Pacific from 1931-45. I also doubt the Spanish get choked up about the Aztecs or the Incas.

Add the Russians both tsarist and bolshevik to the list.

Whiskey said...

Steve, this is just what I predicted. Political power does not rest in defeat. Had Romney won, sure he would have wanted a deal, but he would have like GWB required Republican support and that meant dumping it.

Obama owes ordinary White people nothing but a beating. And he's going to give us one, good and hard. That's what defeat brings. It does not bring a consolation prize like in Kindergarten. It is brutal and ugly. Which is why almost every nation has in history done everything they could to avoid defeat. Given Obama's record of viewing politics as war by other means, guess what?

Open borders. Here they come.

Anonymous said...

Colin Powell who was always a RINO and furthermore despite his support for Obama for being black ,also reveres his Scottish background.

Interesting given that the name is mostly of Welsh origin with a smaller amount being English.

Anononymous said...

Whiskey said...
Open borders. Here they come.

1986 amnesty.

Cail Corishev said...

To people who think we'd be getting this if Romney had won, because some Republicans are pushing it, there's an obvious difference:

Had Romney won, we wouldn't have gotten weeks of shaming from the media about how Republicans didn't "reach out" to Hispanics enough. We wouldn't have GOP strategists trying to come up with a way to squeeze that Hispanic vote up from 30% to 40%. Republicans would be moving forward with their own ideas (whatever those are), not grabbing for the coattails of the Democrats.

This is all about A) Obama slapping middle America across the face, and B) securing the Democrats' majority for the foreseeable future. That's all. If some Republicans see an opportunity for personal advancement in that, or are so paranoid of being called racist that they can't oppose him, that doesn't mean they'd be doing the same thing if he were out of office.

Matra said...

To people who think we'd be getting this if Romney had won, because some Republicans are pushing it, there's an obvious difference:

Had Romney won, we wouldn't have gotten weeks of shaming from the media about how Republicans didn't "reach out" to Hispanics enough.

Maybe. But maybe instead you would've got weeks of shaming about how the "white party" won with virtually no minorities hence the need to reassure minorities, by for example, introducing "comprehensive immigration reform", that the KKK is not in power and that Republicans will govern for all Americans, not just "privileged white people".

We wouldn't have GOP strategists trying to come up with a way to squeeze that Hispanic vote up from 30% to 40%.

Instead GOP strategists would be rewarding business interests who fund the party by providing them with more cheap foreign labour.

Anonymous said...

Colin Powell....reveres his Scottish background.

Somehow I doubt that. Nor do I imagine he is ever mistaken for a Scot.

ATBOTL said...

"If some Republicans see an opportunity for personal advancement in that, or are so paranoid of being called racist that they can't oppose him, that doesn't mean they'd be doing the same thing if he were out of office."

They already did push amnesty, more than once.

stari_momak said...

"Somehow I doubt that. Nor do I imagine he is ever mistaken for a Scot."

Colin Powell -- no true Scotsman.

Dr Van Nostrand said...

Colin Powell....reveres his Scottish background.

Somehow I doubt that. Nor do I imagine he is ever mistaken for a Scot."


THen why did request a Scottish coat of arms?

And it is apparent those who approved his request dont seem to care if he doesnt resemble a Scot in the least.

Anonymous said...

Libertarian-leaning loyalists of the two-time Republican presidential candidate have quietly taken over key-state GOP organizations, ensuring future fights with the GOP's establishment and laying the groundwork for a future presidential candidate.

Their new relevance, especially in early caucus states Iowa and Nevada, could clear the way for such a candidate, perhaps Paul's son, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul. It's the next step in the group's ongoing development, from rambunctious malcontents of just a few years ago into more serious party activists bent on reshaping a party they say has drifted from its conservative roots.

"It's the maturation of the movement," said Matt Strawn, a former Iowa Republican Party chairman not affiliated with Paul. "If you're going to keep
Paul's son supports a legalization but wants to cut off future immirgation however either party would due that. The libertarian/fiscal cons that are mainly into taxes have cut off the cultural consrevatives that were riding high before Paul's rise in politics. Remember 6 years ago was the mintuemen that admired Tom Tancredo instead you get the libertarian branch of the Republican rising to replaced the Bush neo-cons.

Anonymous said...

That's true Republicans are more serious about less important things like guns. The NRA wants to have tanks and bombs and every gun u nder the sun but Norquist which is heavily involed with the NRa wants immmirgants as far as the eye can see to increase consumer demand.

Anonymous said...

The face of new Californians – once predominantly Latino – is increasingly Asian American, census data show.

A seismic shift in immigration has occurred in California over the last decade, with Asia replacing Latin America as the primary source of the state's immigrants.

"This is a pretty astounding change over a short period of time," said Hans Johnson, co-director of the Public Policy Institute of California, citing census data.

"For the first time in decades, the number of Asians coming to California exceeded the flow from Latin America, and it exceeds that flow by a lot – 2 1/2 times greater."

To have Latino immigrants eclipsed by those from Asia over the past five to 10 years "could represent the end of an era," Johnson said.

In 2001, 42 percent of immigrants coming to California were from Latin America, primarily Mexico, while 37 percent were from Asia. In 2011, 57 percent of new immigrants were from Asia, and just 22 percent were from Latin America, census data show.

California's new faces were on display at a swearing-in ceremony at the Sacramento Convention Center on Wednesday. Of the 774 area residents who took the oath of citizenship, about 450 were born in Asia, compared with roughly 160 who were born in Latin America, according to the U.S. Citizenship and and Immigration Services.

They included 119 people from Mexico, 100 from India, 94 from the Philippines, 63 from Vietnam, 35 from Ukraine, 33 from the People's Republic of China and 29 from Laos.

Among those celebrating their newly minted citizenship was Melody Malliet, who dressed in a crisp white suit to take the pledge of allegiance. She came here from the Philippines four years ago to marry an American citizen and is now a nursing assistant in Calaveras County. "It feels so good to be a U.S. citizen," Malliet said with a huge smile. "I'm part of the greatest country in the world."

Filipinos – the largest Asian ethnic group in Sacramento – often come here to fill jobs in health care.

The changing needs of California's economy since the start of the recession explain much of the shift from Latin America to Asia. "Part of what we're seeing is the changing face of California's labor market, which has been increasingly demanding more highly educated workers," Johnson said.

Unemployment has gone up at all levels, "but it's gone up the most for people with high school degrees or less," Johnson said. "Immigrants from Asia, particularly India, tend to be much more highly educated, much more likely to have earned a bachelor's degree."

While 74 percent of recent arrivals from India have at least bachelor's degrees, 59 percent of Mexican immigrants have less than a high school

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/17/5120459/asian-immigrants-to-california.html#storylink=cpy

Anonymous said...

Well, people from Thailand could do maids jobs. There are Africians that replaced Mexicans in meatpacking. The Asian groups could pushed to get more Asians in not just for the better skilled jobs but for more lower skilled jobs pushing legal and illegal Mexicans out of jobs. Asians are buying up business and in Asian own Hotels they prefer to hire Asians over Whites or Hispanics.

Anonymous said...

The disparity between Orange County and Los Angeles County, where unemployment was at 10.2 percent last month, can be partly explained by education. "In LA County only 75 percent of workers have at least a high school degree," Kleinhenz said. "In Orange County, it is more than 86 percent percent. People with less education have fared worse than those with college degrees This is another reason why Hispanics voted heaivly Democratic. La is about 4 to 48 percent Hispanic while Orange County 20 and above is still only 34 or 35 percent. Its in the children population well Orange County goes thru another recession in the 2020's it will not have an advanage over La since the kids populatin is 49 percent Hispanic

Anonymous said...

Rubio and Company do not think that unemployment rates are higher among Hispanics than Whites since they have lower levels of education. They think Hispanics are a verison of Kentucky or West Virginia who are poor but vote Republican on the social issues. Kentucky and West Virginia are mainly White evangelicals while Hispanics are mainly still Catholics.

24AheadDotCom said...

Amnesty is absurdly easy to block if I could get the help of just several dozen people (or less).

The problem is few people want to do anything, or when they can be moved to do something it's something stupid (like standing on a street corner waving a sign).

And, most people fall for charlatans, such as "conservative" leaders who are supporters of amnesty or who are weak on it.

If anyone's willing to things that are smart and effective, let me know.

Evil Sandmich said...

What's the point? The status quo is let anyone in and never enforce the law; much like the Federal 'budget' is to keep spending money until the currency is a zero. Neither is ever going to be fixed by any federalie law that will then in turn, never be enforced.

Anonymous said...

Going Galt but hurt illegal immirgaton. A lot of whites in Ca and Tx and other places need to go into online business where you would hire your relatives not illegal immirgants. This trend needs to be pushed in Republican circles, believe it Gringrich about 30 years ago talk about home based business. There is a trend among whites in California to be self-employed the reason I know is that Yorba Linda is a self-employed city.

Anonymous said...

24ahead.com is correct. A lot of Republicans complain about illegal immirgants but guess what state they head to Texas which is number 2 in the total number of illegal immirgants. If these people were serious on illegal immirgation they would head for Arizona or one of the soutthern states that have tried to do something like Al or SC or Ok.

Anonymous said...

Mexicans are big whiners. Anyway, one got deported and made not bad money for Mexico in a Call Center but he made better money in SA in Texas as auto mechniac what if he did fastfood in SA at $7.25 per hr instead he made about 4,000 a month , so he is whining about it. I saw a video about two asians that return to their parents country one to Vietnam and the other to China. they both started business there. I doubt that the illegal kids that get be me legalized will return to Mexico it they get the skills like the asians. Mexicans are just whiners.

Anonymous said...

Bush pushed legalization of Hispanics I think three times, he wanted it. He wasn't going to dumped it because of Republican opposition that why he tried it three times until he realized that he didn't have enough support.

Anonymous said...

I will be happy when Hispanic birthrates moved down to 2.0. I think that Mexicans now with the bad economy are dropping now and hopefully this trend will constinue.

Anonymous said...

Well, it shows that Hispanics mainly Mexcians represent about 51 percent of the kids in California at least it seems to be the percentage has not changed in the past 2 to 3 years. Whites frozen at 27 percent and more conservative ones hate the state because of politcs and when they have an opporuntity they may moved but probably most of the white conservatives are past the childbearing years more middle ages or older. Asians at 10.7 percent of the cildren population like whites their in older age groups. Recent population trends of Chinese or Indians might bring their toatals up since I believe they have more kids than some of the other asians. Black kids down at 5.7 percent.

Anonymous said...

Rubio and company may see the end of the Great Hispanic expansion out of Mexico, instead of the 31 percent predicted for the Us or 55 to 60 percent in California or Texas in the 2020's their growth rate might continue to drop due to immirgation drops and birthrate drops. It just depends if legalization happens in 2013 oe not.

Anonymous said...

Another thing since hispanics now are 47 percent or more of the high school graduates in Ca, the freshman class of UC had about 32 percent of them apply slightly more than the much smaller asians and whites at 27 percent. This probably is the top 15 percent of hispanic kids and I predict they wil probably marry whites or asians more and become less hispanic in the future. This means that Ca or Tx or New Mexico Hispanic growth will slow because the elite will marry whites or asians.

Anonymous said...

Fresno, Modesto and Bakersfield-Delano areas are among the top five U.S. regions with the highest percentage of residents living below the poverty line.

The Fresno area, ranked as the second most impoverished in the nation, trailed only the U.S.-Mexico border area of McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas, the American Community Survey figures show.

Bakersfield-Delano and Modesto ranked fourth and fifth. The data compared large metro areas in 2011 of half million people or more.

The valley's poverty rate is high even though its agricultural

Anonymous said...

Another thing California proves that a high Mexican population in the long run leads oddly enough to slower population growth. California isn't having the kids as much maybe the hispaniczation which lead to whites leaving the cheaper older areas and going to more expensive areas to get away from hispanic growth means that it doesn't help the population grwoth in the long run.

Anonymous said...

Many of those future workers, however, will have grown up in poverty. More than 20% of children in California now live below the federal poverty level.

The report found that the birthrate had tumbled for every population group. In 2010, it was below replacement level for whites, Asians and African-Americans.

The birthrate for Hispanics, who account for 51% of children under 18 in the state, was slightly above replacement level. But Hispanic birthrates are seeing the steepest drop of any group and are expected to fall to the replacement level in 2020, the report said.

Anonymous said...

I don't get what's so great about Mexican immigration. Just look at Mexico.