Ann’s rant continues,
Good luck to the rest of the world when the U.S. is Mexico-Norte.
Which is happening faster than you might think. By now, America has taken in about one-third of Mexico’s entire population. And that’s to say nothing of El Salvador, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Venezuela and the other poverty-ridden countries to our south.
Since 1980, the Hispanic population in the U.S. has exploded from about 14 million to 71 million, or 21% of the population. Add in the other dissonant cultures that have come from places like Africa and the Middle East, and America is less than a generation away from white Westerners becoming a minority.
Ugly enough for you? Coulter sounds like the reincarnation of Pat Buchanan, who also worried about what shade America’s majority would be. I had forgotten how anti-Catholic Ann Coulter is, along with being anti-Mexican, anti-South and Central American, and anti-legal immigration.
Fact 1: This was the same kind of bigotry focused on the Italians and the Irish when they started taking over Boston in the 19th Century.
Fact 2: Catholics have a well-embedded work-ethic, believe in traditional families, and have a strong moral code that the rest of the population would do well to absorb a bit of as well.
Fact 3: Islam by its own edicts resists assimilation. Analogizing Mexicans to Muslims is willfully deceptive, unless Ann really believes that, in which case it’s inexcusably ignorant.
Fact 4: I don’t know why my work with the National Chamber Foundation has popped up twice this week already, but whatever: by far my favorite mass study was the NCF’s report on Hispanic business in the U.S., in which my major partner was the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. All of our research (the project was funded by PepsiCo, among others) kept proving that Hispanics wanted to hold on to their culture but were adept at adopting U.S. culture as well, and that they were committed capitalists, believed in core American values, were instinctively conservative, and were an asset in all respects, not the threat to our nation that the Muslims are to Europe.
One genuine cultural clash was a constant source of debate: the weird cultural norm still flourishing South of the Border in which being on time for anything—meetings, appointments, weddings, dinner parties—is considered optional. But the Mexicans on our committee unanimously agreed that the “manana” habit was a self-inflicted handicap Mexican-Americans had to abandon, along with not mastering English, or condemn themselves to underclass status.
Oh, I almost forgot: Shut up, Ann.
Ethics Alarms 
I would like to ask our host Jack if “The Great Replacement” theory as applied to Europe is basically correct, based on the religion and cultural attitudes of the immigrants.
My second question is why “The Great Replacement” does not apply to the hordes of illegal immigrants who swamped the US borders during the Biden administration? Do those illegal immigrants represent the average population of Latin American countries? Or is the criminal element overrepresented? Hereby I think about Venezuela’s tactic to dump their prison population onto US soil. Kilmar Abrego Garcia may better represent illegal immigrants than the many Hispanics (including legal immigrants) serving in the US military.
One motive behind illegal immigration keeps popping up. The Democrat Party want a new and better electorate, with strong constituencies that keep them in power forever. Illegal immigrants are such a constituency. This is also why Democrats want to keep the election process insecure, with mail-in ballots, vote harvesting, and no ID required.
Liberals (or shall I say socialists) in both Europe and USA subscribe to multiculturalism and globalism, have a diminished view of Western Civilization and the Judeo-Christian tradition, and are low on patriotism and nationalism.
I am all in favor of legal immigration, with a proper vetting process. Uncontrolled mass immigration as we are seeing in Europe and as we have seen under the Biden administration makes people uncomfortable, and one of the reason is that many of these immigrants (or asylum seeker or whatever you want to call them) make people uncomfortable. That is because on average this contingent of immigrants do not represent the best humanity has to offer. And people who are willing to say that aloud are being called a racist. And “racist” is a term that has been devaluated to almost zero due to overuse. The outcome of the 2024 Presidential elections demonstrated how powerless the term “racist” has become. Half the population stops listening when somebody uses the term “racism” to make a point.
We may not share Ann Coulter’s or Pat Buchanan’s values, and express our displeasure about their values by tossing around terms like “racism”. What matter is whether they are correct on the facts. Has immigration provide a net benefit to the USA in the last decades? Can we break that down by country of Origin and ethnicity, and ask whether immigration of Somali’s and Haitians have provided a net benefit to the USA in the last decades? Or people of Latino descent. Are we allowed to ask these questions, without being hampered by racial taboos?
Yes, except again, this is Hanlon’s Razor at work in Europe. They weren’t trying to turn Europe Muslim, they just were too stupid to realize that’s what would happen.
The GRT originated as a trope against legal immigration. It was at heart racist, because it predated such Biden era idiocy like allowing an undigestable mass of Somalis or Haitians to move into small midwestern towns.
The problem isn’t color. Coulter keeps coming back to that, jsut as Buchanan did, and people like her is why efforts to slime opponents of open borders as “xenophobic” are still effective.
i would take 100 legal hispanics over 1 muslim, legal or illegal