You should stop there however, and not delve into "loss of culture" claims. Adding people from other countries to our country does not destroy our culture. It will change our culture to an extent but many people believe the changes would be good ones (and the past history of our country lends strong support to that belief) . The extent of change is also overstated (with sensible immigration regulations) because the change is not unidirectional. Immigrants are and will continue to be "changed" by adapting to the existing culture just as much if not more than they "change" the existing culture.

Does the Left think Iraqis don't deserve freedom? Hilarious! Even better!

Well, it would have been if you had thought it up all by yourself, but you know how it is. No one wants to saddle you with unwarranted expectations.

The world's finest military launches a highly coordinated shock-and-awe attack that shows enormous initial progress. There's talk of the victorious troops being home for Christmas. But the war unexpectedly drags on. As fighting persists into a third, and then a fourth year, voices are heard calling for negotiations, even "peace without victory." Dismissing such peaceniks and critics as defeatists, a conservative and expansionist regime -- led by a figurehead who often resorts to simplistic slogans and his Machiavellian sidekick who is considered the brains behind the throne -- calls for one last surge to victory. Unbeknownst to the people on the home front, however, this duo has already prepared a seductive and self-exculpatory myth in case the surge fails.

The United States in 2007? No, Wilhelmine Germany in 1917 and 1918, as its military dictators, Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg and his loyal second, General Erich Ludendorff, pushed Germany toward defeat and revolution in a relentless pursuit of victory in World War I. Having failed with their surge strategy on the Western Front in 1918, they nevertheless succeeded in deploying a stab-in-the-back myth, or Dolchstoßlegende, that shifted blame for defeat from themselves and Rightist politicians to Social Democrats and others allegedly responsible for losing the war by their failure to support the troops at home.
...
In today's Iraq -- again the McCain version -- Gen. David Petraeus is the new Abrams, finally the right general for the job. And his new tactic of protecting the Iraqi people, thereby winning their hearts and minds, is working. Victory beckons at the end of the "long, hard path" (that evidently has replaced the Vietnamese tunnel), unless the American people run out of patience, as they did back in the late 1960s.

McCain is no Hindenburg. Yet his almost automatic displacement of ultimate responsibility from the Bush administration and the military to the American people indicates the traction the stab-in-the-back myth has already gained in mainstream politics. For the moment, with hope for some kind of victory, however defined, not quite vanquished in official circles, our latest dagger-myth remains sheathed, its murderous power as yet unwielded.

JGarza is being dishonest.

example 2

Sure (none / 0) (#35)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 04, 2007 at 05:05:02 PM EST
I am unfair in my criticisms of Clinton.
You are simply dishonest on this.

example 3

That is NOT what she wrote (none / 0) (#33)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 04, 2007 at 05:03:08 PM EST
She mimicked an African american use.

You are being dishonest

really you don't?