Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
David French on Native-Born Ingrates
David French has a new article on immigrants.
Immigrant citizens don’t owe a special debt of gratitude of to this nation — a debt over and above the gratitude that native-born citizens should feel for their home country. To be crystal clear, I believe Ilhan Omar and every citizen immigrant should be grateful for their place in this country. What I reject is the notion that native-born citizens like myself can demand a level of gratitude from immigrants beyond what we demand from native-born citizens.
In fact, to the extent that we should parse gratitude at all, I assert a simple proposition — the people who did exactly nothing to become citizens of the greatest nation in the history of the earth should be among the most grateful people on this planet. We should be grateful to God that we weren’t born elsewhere. We should be grateful to those who gave their “last full measure of devotion” to defend our nation and our Constitution. We should be grateful for those who endure great hardship to defend our liberty, safety, and prosperity.
Against the backdrop of this immense American gift, native-born Americans by the countless millions don’t trouble themselves to be educated enough about their own country to pass the basic citizenship test that we give to prospective citizen immigrants. All too many native-born citizens forsake the moral obligations of citizenship and instead focus only on reaping its considerable legal and constitutional benefits.
I think French is wrong. I think my native birth is worth more, because my parents sacrificed a lot to make this country better. My father and his brothers and fought in WWII. My brothers-in-law fought in Vietnam. I have been signed up for selective service for 35 years. Together we have paid about a hundred years of taxes to build the $100 trillion of infrastructure the USA has. Isn’t that worth something? David French seems to say “no”.
My story is actually very common. People fight and work and die to make the country better. It seems to me that those sacrifices build up an inheritable equity and when we choose to share that equity with outsiders, the newcomers should be extra thankful to get a share. I don’t care about civics tests, because I think that being American takes more know-how than can be summarized on a 3×5 card. A lifetime of living American counts for a lot, even if somebody cannot summarize the first three articles of the Constitution.
I am not saying that immigrants can’t be great Americans. I know many that are. I am saying that great Americans are always thankful for the opportunity to be American and appreciate the efforts of those that built and sustained the greatest country ever.
Published in Immigration
Prediction: Trump will say something in the future which his political opposition will accuse Trump of being racist …
Prediction: The (D)/MSM combine will feign outrage and demand Trump be impeached …
What was the term in computer coding back in the 1980’s …. the infinite loop?
Ok
He writes: Democrats were very comfortable with questioning the patriotism of anyone who opposed Barack Obama’s agenda. VERY comfortable. The media never had any problem with it whatsoever.
Which worked out to a Republican House, Republican Senate and a near sweep of the American State Houses and Governor mansions. That is how fantastic the Democrat strategy was. We can only dream of such success! They also got Trump.
He writes: The GOP response to vicious Democrat rhetoric was always required to include a ritual denunciation of their own voters. They could never call out the Dems for divisive rhetoric without making it a general call for *everyone* to be more civil.
No such requirement. Bull crap.
He writes: Perhaps most importantly, Republicans weren’t supposed to attack the Dems’ IDEAS as inherently divisive, hateful, or unpatriotic. They could tut-tut rhetoric but were required to proclaim Democrats were great Americans who meant well, even if they got a few things wrong.
Who did this? All I advocated for was people to attack Dem’s IDEAS! Full speed ahead, damn the torpedoes, let’s roll! You want me on the Trump train get Trump to do that.
He writes: Repubs told themselves Dems were only hurting their own cause with wild, hateful, emotionally charged rhetoric. They would alienate thoughtful voters who would turn to the sober and thoughtful GOP.
They were right and it is why Merrick Garland is not on the Supreme Court. Romney did not do enough to make Obama look unreasonable because it was Obama’s special charisma power to make himself look reasonable when he was anything but reasonable. But for all other Democrats their rhetoric about Republicans being the Taliban and such was political death..
He writes: This left Republican voters feeling alienated and abandoned. Why wouldn’t their representatives ever stand up for them, trading punches with the people who called them ignorant and immoral, questioning their patriotism and their very humanity?
In context he is wrong of course but in general this has been true a long time. As a Pro-life activist I was nearly in constant state of rage over the inability of the Republican politicians to nail Democrats on the most basic pro-life issues. Incredibly frustrating and I get the how not taking down Obama really frustrated voters.
He writes: The totalitarian Democrat platform is all about deplatforming, disenfranchising, and dominating. They imperiously command that huge numbers of hard-working Americans have no right to vote on, or even talk about, policy debates with trillion-dollar implications.
Exactly why Chick-fil-a is out of business today. This kind of thing is unstoppable. Once they decide to smear you, it means you are doomed like Chick-Fil’a and Hobby Lobby.
Not necessarily.
– Normally the party in power loses seats in that cycle.
– A lot of establishment GOP types retired
– Democrats ran many centrists
I predict Trump will win substantially in 2020 and win the House too.
But we don’t know.
But I would not think if he lost ( absent some obvious failing yet to come) that Trump was a failure if he lost. He is the best politician since Reagan. He works harder than every modern President and tries to implement his campaign promises. He’s more transparent than any President, perhaps in history. I can’t believe he could possibly win over the media or the left.
If Rocky Balboa lost a boxing match against two boxers and a crooked referee and bought-off judges, I wouldn’t blame poor boxing skills.
Continues from comment 92.
He write: Repubs aren’t supposed to take Dem rhetoric seriously or hold them up to it. They’re supposed to assume the best of intentions and ignore the extremism. Nuts to that.
No way. Nuts to this strawman! Hold them up to their rhetoric right on! Make them own up to their own statements, right on! Don’t give them cover with a clumsy racist attack that obscures how extreme they are.
You keep calling what the President said “racist” but have yet to show me the racist content.
I suspect we are in agreement over far more than we are in disagreement, but the sticking point is that you and David French et al waste all your energy tone policing our side.
It doesn’t matter what the President said or how he said it. The left (and you, apparently) will call him racist (not true) no matter what. The right has spent so many years on defensive against these ridiculous attacks that we’ve allowed the left to colonize our minds. The President is not a racist.
Oh sorry. You just go on ad on in a way that makes one think you are calling Trump racist.
See how easy this is?
Except you are. You are on the Trump is rascist bandwagon
Great, ‘Civil Servant-minded, Deep Staters’ in charge of that system. What could possible go wrong? Think AOC or Ohmar will have better scores than most of us Ricochetti?
I thought about negative equity. In probate law all debts are wiped out by death. That seems fair and fits our Christian founding. Probate law also allows for inheritance of accumulated assets. We want to encourage that, because it gives people an incentive to work hard and take risks to gather more wealth.
Seems like gaming the system. Positive inheritance works for me in terms of moral authority but negative inheritance is ignored.
And they will call us Racist, no matter what we do.
Look what they did to Dick Cheny
And nothing is achieved by agreeing with their false assertion that the President is a racist.
Crush the Demoncrats, See them driven before you, Hear the lamentations of their Media.
What? Maybe in China, not in America-fails the test of individual freedom.
This David French guy is always trying to change the subject. The four Congresswomen are conducting themselves in a very unAmerican fashion totally unbecoming to the role their constituents have bestowed on them. Anyone serving in Congress should be an American patriot. The President is positioning them, and the Democrats, in exactly the way they deserve based on their expressed policy positions.
I think that French is obviously and demonstrably wrong. Immigrants owe a debt of gratitude to America that is not owed by the native-born.
If you are a legal immigrant, then you owe a debt of gratitude to America for letting you immigrate. This was a public policy decision made by the people of America.
If you are native-born, you owe a debt of gratitude to God for arranging the Universe such that you were born here, but you do not owe a debt of gratitude to America for this good fortune.
Both immigrants and native-born owe a debt of gratitude to America for its culture, laws, and economic system. But there is an element of gratitude owed by an immigrant that does not apply to a native.
I also think that French’s argument is tone-deaf.
The problem is that, like so many others on the Conservative side, he has adopted an erroneous view of America, largely based on Leftist propaganda. Notice how good they are at attaching a demeaning label to ideas with which they disagree? “Xenophobic” is one. If you have any objection to anything foreign, you’re labeled an irrational hater. (French did not use the word “xenophobic,” but I think that his reasoning is based on this idea.)
The idea used to be that immigrants were supposed to assimilate to America and American ways. Now we’re supposed to assimilate to the immigrants’ culture, to accommodate their often horrid ways and ideology, and if we complain about it, we’re slandered as racist xenophobes.
Of course, a big problem is that we no longer have a consensus about what it means to be an American and to follow American ways. A central issue in our current politics is the efforts of Democrats to prevent enforcement of the immigration laws in order to convert criminal illegal aliens into voters, who will tip the political balance in their favor.
No, thank you.
I often get into debates like this with Trump supporters so I do know how easy it is to do this.
Sure I have it. You simply don’t acknowledge it. Which is fine for you. You have every right to set your bar for racism where ever you wish to set it. We are talking about politics here and perceptions. Clearly Trump tweet was worded in a way that can easily be taken as racism. I don’t think Trump was revealing himself to be a racist but he is often clumsy with his tweets and he likes to weaken his attacks against the left by giving them an excuse to ignoring the substance of his attack. His supporters like what they believe is the true point of his attack, which is The Squad’s politics are un-American, and they rush to defend him. Trump believes this helps him politically. I think it is dumb and it does help any of us build a bigger winning coalition so that the Dems are kept out of power.
More like begging our side to be more effective, as opposed to tone policing.
Of course it matters! Good Lord….
A libel.
True and it would helpful to his Presidency to not speak like one.
How?
Exactly that is why making them pay for it is important. Remember the Kerry Campaign met on their goals for what it would take to beat Bush and they were wrong because the Bush team did so much better than Kerry thought. Bush was able to take the Democrats extreme attacks and turn them against the Dems and they lost. Badly.
More of that and less leaning into the racist attacks please.
Agreed. Nor does it help for Trump to thoughtlessly give evidence of racism by using dumb, cumbersome attacks that could be made in far more powerful ways.
Here’s how: your comments make you have to argue and point out over and over that you don’t think and you are not saying that President Trump is racist. How is that different from the need for President Trump’s supporters to argue and point out that he is not racist and neither was his tweet? Both of us are doing the same thing.
First sentence both you and David French agree. Second sentence you have a disagreement I suppose but it is not a major one. David French is just saying your gratitude should be heightened because you started here free and clear. Immigrants had to strive, work and make effort to get here native born did not.
I don’t think the distinctions either way are all that useful. Everyone should be grateful for being a US citizen full stop. Native born and immigrants have a slightly different reason and emphasis for their gratitude I think but the distinctions aren’t that important.
Trump making a clear and direct attack on the Squad’s ingratitude could be a very powerful line of attack. They should be grateful for their home. He could have made that kind of attack but he did not.
Do you have any evidence for this? French’s entire point is that gratitude is owed to America because it is better place to live then anywhere else. Where is his praise for the foreign? All the ladies of the “Squad” are American citizens none of them are foreign though Omar was born somewhere else she is an American. Trump didn’t criticize any foreigners.
His tweet used obviously racist language. That is the main reason that it was dumb. The same point and the same attack could have been made without using racist language, which would have made the attack more powerful. That is the second reason it was dumb.
Saying that President Trump is not personally a racist I think is true and therefore defensible his tweet is not so easily defended. Pretending that it was not a dumb tweet using racist language does not help President Trump or our cause.
Thirty years ago I was beginning to hear thoughts that the melting pot analogy should be changed to a salad bowl one. Instead of merging into one American culture, e pluribus unum, everyone was being mixed together but not merging together. It’s gotten a lot worse since then.
Siding with the Democrats against him — how does that help our cause?
https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/dems-to-tapper-on-racist-tweets-the-president-won-this-one/
You keep calling things that were not racist, racist?
Frankly, bringing up Bush blows me away. Bush did not fight back. He let them paint him as Hitler.
You appear to want to keep do things as they used to be done. That has worked so, so well, in the past after all.
Note, Jack Tapper now has Democrats saying that Trump won this one. Link above.