Who We Are as a People, part II
I would like to continue on from where I left off in the previous post. Actually, this article should be started with an excerpt or teaser and then continued on to its on up top page. Maybe when I am done with most of it I will put the entire contents up top as a page.
On the other hand, I will admit that much of this material is coming directly from my yet unfinished and unpublished book to see the interest level in the areas I chose to go. This is a strong suggestion from my editor, therefore, I get to use the format and especially the delivery I hope will work out. So far the first part of Who We Are as a People has posted the highest number of interests in the month of November 2016!
There are several twists and turns in this piece, hence the title. Yet, I do hope for your honesty in your responses. Ready? Let’s get right into it →→↓
One only has to observe the results of the refugee crisis in Europe to see what is in store for the American homeland. However, it is realized by this individual that the European nations are definitely different from the ways our nation was supposed to be run from day-to-day based on the Framer’s ideological rules and policies. If you would care to see any of these ideologies my suggestion would be to type, Founders, The American Way, illegal immigration or the Constitution within the search box in the upper right-hand portion of this page you are now reading. Or one could go to the Categories section and select any of those or of course, go on up to the pages.
Yet the Obama administration, following Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government in Germany. is adamant that the number of Syrian refugees — and other Muslim refugees generally — must increase substantially. Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who recently named Angela Merkel as her favorite world leader, has frequently indicated that acceptance of refugees is an important reaffirmation of America’s commitment to diversity.
Not desirous of wanting to break anyone’s bubble here, but the following is a very qualified aspiration presented to me during the reading of Ann Coulter’s best-selling book, Adios, America! which if one takes the time to read for meaning…Well here’s Ms. Coulter: “Americans used to talk about “integration.” Then one day, out of the blue, the word “integration” got replaced with “diversity” — just like “global warming” suddenly became “climate change” — then “July.” Integration was about redressing historic wrongs done to black Americans. Diversity is not. Under the diversity regime, everyone gets special rights and privileges, except white men.
Think of it this way — Affirmative action, welfare, enterprise zones, minority set asides — all these used to be justified by the legacy of oppression: It all goes back to the Middle Passage! However, wait a minute! (my words) But now we are talking about social welfare being dispensed I great heaping portions to Hmong, Somalis, and Latin Americans. They arrived circa 1997. So now liberals act as if they never mentioned anything about the redress of historic grievances.
The entire edifice of civil rights and discrimination law was meant to address the black experience in America, not to reward anyone who has entered our nation with resentments. The idea went something along these lines — Okay we have roughly 10 percent of the population that got the short end of the stick for a couple of centuries, so we’re spending it all on them.
America altered constitutional provisions about private property and freedom of contract — for blacks. Huge social welfare programs were established for blacks — Affirmative action policies and racial quotas were developed for blacks. We agreed to virtually criminalize the use of certain words — for blacks.
Please take a moment and think or rethink these integrative plans that have without justification ended up under the umbrella of the diversity regime.