This speech was given in 2004 but it rings even truer today.
SAFEHAVEN
How To Destroy America
By: Dick Lamm |Richard Douglas “Dick” Lamm is an American politician and lawyer. He served three terms as Governor of Colorado as a Democrat (1975-1987) and ran for the Reform Party’s nomination for President of the United States in 1996.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
(Editor’s note: A 2004 speech on the dangers of multiculturalism in the United Stated titled “I Have a Plan to Destroy America”, became famous after being frequently forwarded as an email. With the immigration debate again heating up, it is time to revisit the speech. Reprinted with permission.)
We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. Recently there was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of American’s finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Davis Hansen talked about his latest book, Mexifornia, explaining how immigration – both legal and illegal was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.
Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States. He said, “If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that ‘An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.'”
“Here is how they do it,” Lamm said:
“First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country.” History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour Lipset, put it this way: ‘The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy.’ Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, and Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.”
Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, “Invent ‘multiculturalism’ and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. I would make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds (more…)
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: It fell to a freshman congressman, speaking at CPAC on the same day as Rand Paul, to tell some hard truths. “I know there is war weariness among the American people, just like there is war weariness among conservatives, and in this audience, no doubt,” said Tom Cotton from Yell County, Arkansas. “It’s no surprise, though, that the American people are war weary when their commander in chief is the weariest of them all.”
But, Cotton reminded his audience, “We’re fighting . . . a war against radical Islam and jihad.” He continued, “Our president often says 10 years of war are ending. Wars are not movies. They do not end. They are won or they are lost. The quickest way to end a war is to lose it.” And Cotton pointed out the obvious: “We have the manpower to win the war. We have the matériel to win the war. The question is, do we have the most essential element to combat power? Do we have the will to win the war? Our enemies certainly have that will. They question now whether we do.”
“The GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered,” Kentucky senator Rand Paul said Thursday to the Conservative Political Action Conference. “I don’t think we need to name any names here, do we?” he added coyly.
The names he had in mind were of course those of John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Those spokesmen for “the GOP of old” had the bad form to call out Rand Paul after he took to the Senate floor to speculate glibly about American presidents and American military and intelligence officers calling in unprovoked domestic drone strikes against innocent Americans. McCain and Graham, advocates of what Paul calls an “aggressive” foreign policy—i.e., the foreign policy of the Republican party for the last 70 years—also challenged Paul’s general foreign policy prescription.
What does Dr. Paul prescribe? In an interview last week, Paul appealed to the wisdom of Vice President Joe Biden. In the 2012 vice presidential debate, Paul said, Biden had a good response to Paul Ryan on Afghanistan: “We’re coming home.” And, Paul continued, “I think that’s what people want. I think that’s what people are ready for, that we’re coming home.” And why does Paul think the American people are now ready for this McGovernite message? “War weariness.”
Are the American people war weary? Yes, to some degree. Could there be a worse prescription for American foreign policy than giving in to popular war weariness? No.
It was (well-deserved) war weariness after World War II that led to a precipitous drawdown in Europe that in turn helped make possible Stalin’s subjugation of Eastern Europe. It was understandable war weariness after Vietnam that produced the shameful abandonment of Vietnam and Cambodia and the subsequent disastrous weakness of the Carter administration. It was (somewhat inexplicable) war weariness after the Cold War that led to a conviction in the 1990s, as Haley Barbour put it just last week, trying to accommodate the Paulistas, that “We’re not the policeman of the world.”
And thus we had the failure to finish the job in Iraq in 1991, the retreat under fire from Somalia in late 1993, inaction in Rwanda in 1994, years of dithering before confronting Milosevic in the Balkans, passivity in the face of the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, and weak responses to al Qaeda’s attacks on U.S. embassies in 1998 and the USS Cole in 2000. That decade of not policing the world ended with 9/11. (more…)
Full Text of Sen. Rand Paul’s Tea Party Response to Obama’s State of the Union Address:
I speak to you tonight from Washington, D.C. The state of our economy is tenuous but our people remain the greatest example of freedom and prosperity the world has ever known.
People say America is exceptional. I agree, but it’s not the complexion of our skin or the twists in our DNA that make us unique. America is exceptional because we were founded upon the notion that everyone should be free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
For the first time in history, men and women were guaranteed a chance to succeed based NOT on who your parents were but on your own initiative and desire to work.
We are in danger, though, of forgetting what made us great. The President seems to think the country can continue to borrow $50,000 per second. The President believes that we should just squeeze more money out of those who are working.
The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this Administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of this great nation.
Ronald Reagan said, government is not the answer to the problem, government is the problem.
Tonight, the President told the nation he disagrees. President Obama believes government is the solution: More government, more taxes, more debt.
What the President fails to grasp is that the American system that rewards hard work is what made America so prosperous.
What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith. In the year we won our independence, Adam Smith described what creates the Wealth of Nations. (more…)
By George Weigel— George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.
The most inane insta-pundit commentary had it that the 2012 election “hadn’t really changed anything,” what with President Obama still in the White House, the House still in Republican hands, and the Senate still controlled by Democrats. The truth of the matter, of course, is that a great deal changed, somewhere around 11 p.m. EST on Tuesday, November 7, when Ohio was declared for the president and the race was effectively over. To wit:
Obamacare, the governmental takeover of one-sixth of the U.S. economy, is now set in legislative concrete, and the progressive campaign to turn ever-larger numbers of citizens into wards of the state has been given a tremendous boost — with electoral consequences as far as the eye can see.
A war in the Middle East is now almost certain, and sooner rather than later; as if the previous three and a half years of fecklessness were not enough, the cast of mind manifest in the administration’s abdication of responsibility in Benghazi will have likely convinced a critical mass of the Israeli leadership that they have no choice but to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in self-defense. The economic chaos resulting from military conflict in the Persian Gulf (and beyond) will further deepen the European fiscal crisis while making an already weak American economic recovery even more anemic.
The children and grandchildren of November 6’s voters have been condemned to bear the burden of what is certainly an unpayable mountain of debt, and may be an unserviceable amount of debt, which in either case will be an enormous drag on the economy, even as it mortgages America’s strategic options in Asia to the holders of U.S. government bonds in Beijing.
The American culture war has been markedly intensified, as those who booed God, celebrated an unfettered abortion license, canonized Sandra Fluke, and sacramentalized sodomy at the Democratic National Convention will have been emboldened to advance the cause of lifestyle libertinism through coercive state power, thus deepening the danger of what a noted Bavarian theologian calls the “dictatorship of relativism.”
Religious freedom and civil society are now in greater jeopardy than ever, as what was already the most secularist and statist administration in history will, unfettered by reelection concerns, accelerate its efforts to bring free voluntary associations to heel as de facto extensions of the state.
The following article was written by one of our new conservative ladies, Linda Devore, of Fayetteville, North Carolina. Linda and I were roommates in Tampa at the RNC Convention where I learned that she writes a regular column for the Fayobserver. Think you are going to enjoy reading her latest column about Libertarians and the Republican party (A very hot topic at the convention !) . Nancy
By Linda Devore Fayetteville resident Linda Devore is a community activist and member of the Observer’s Community Advisory Board. She can be reached at lindev@aol.com.
Some say that the Me Generation began with the free love of the ’60s, self-absorption of the ’70s, and matured into the material greed of the ’80s. Whatever the genesis, it is still around.
It is disturbing to watch as affinities for self-indulgence and greed have found rampant voice in political ideologies and public policies. Public policy should be, after all, about the common good – not the common greed. About us – not me.
The other view
Not everyone agrees. A recent conversation with a young, former military man who claims libertarian views, is a case in point. He was a member of the North Carolina Republican delegation in Tampa. He got there because Ron Paul followers have gained some considerable influence in the county Republican Party, and claim to have a high level of financial support from military members here and throughout the country.
We spent nearly two hours exploring his views, especially his claim that “greed is good.” We disagreed. Greed is not good. Ambition is good, as long as it is not overtaken by greed, I argued. We managed civil tones, but he remained convinced of the righteousness of absolute individual liberty.
The same libertarian voice claims that government should not define marriage, marijuana possession laws should be abolished, military interventions ended, and the Federal Reserve shut down, along with the federal departments of energy, education, and … what was that third one?
If those don’t all sound like conservative views, that is because libertarians are not all – or not at all – conservative, depending on who you ask. Few may know that in other countries, libertarians are seen as anarchists for their bent toward little or no government. (more…)
Russ Caswell, 68, is bewildered: “What country are we in?” He and his wife, Pat, are ensnared in a Kafkaesque nightmare unfolding in Orwellian language.
This town’s police department is conniving with the federal government to circumvent Massachusetts law — which is less permissive than federal law — to seize his livelihood and retirement asset. In the lawsuit titled United States of America v. 434 Main Street, Tewksbury, Massachusetts, the government is suing an inanimate object, the motel Caswell’s father built in 1955. The U.S. Department of Justice intends to seize it, sell it for perhaps $1.5 million and give up to 80 percent of that to the Tewksbury Police Department, whose budget is just $5.5 million. The Caswells have not been charged with, let alone convicted of, a crime. They are being persecuted by two governments eager to profit from what is antiseptically called the “equitable sharing” of the fruits of civil forfeiture, a process of government enrichment that often is indistinguishable from robbery.
The Merrimack River Valley near the New Hampshire border has had more downs than ups since the 19th century, when the nearby towns of Lowell and Lawrence were centers of America’s textile industry. In the 1960s the area briefly enjoyed a high-tech boom. Caswell’s “budget” motel, too, has seen better days, as when the touring Annette Funicello and the Mouseketeers checked in. In its sixth decade the motel hosts tourists, some workers on extended stays and some elderly people who call it home. The 56 rooms rent for $56 a night or $285 a week.
Since 1994, about 30 motel customers have been arrested on drug-dealing charges. Even if those police figures are accurate — the police have a substantial monetary incentive to exaggerate — these 30 episodes involved less than 5/100ths of 1 percent of the 125,000 rooms Caswell has rented over those more than 6,700 days. Yet this is the government’s excuse for impoverishing the Caswells by seizing this property, which is their only significant source of income and all of their retirement security. (more…)
Presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, shakes hands with Army Cpl. Jesse Thorsen during his January caucus night rally, in Ankeny, Iowa. Mr. Paul has been getting extensive campaign-contribution support from enlisted people and civilians in the military, far exceeding his GOP rivals for the nomination. (Associated Press)
Enlisted personnel and civilian military employees are donating more to presidential campaigns than in previous elections, and they overwhelmingly prefer two candidates: Ron Paul, the long-shot Republican presidential contender opposed to using U.S. forces as the “world’s police,” and President Obama.
Mr. Paul and Mr. Obama, who’s slashing the Pentagon’s budget, have received nearly the same number of donations of at least $200 from military voters, but the GOP candidate’s haul adds up to $100,000 more than the president’s, a Washington Times analysis of publicly available Federal Election Commission records show.
Each has lapped the rest of the GOP field several times, taking in 20 times as many military donations as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and more money than all their rivals combined. Mr. Paul took in $300,588 to Mr. Romney’s $30,293.(more…)
In the Republican presidential candidates’ debate on January 7, Congressman Ron Paul said: “I’m the only one up here . . . that understands true racism in this country is in the judicial system.”
He said this racism has to do with “enforcing the drug laws,”and then added: “They [blacks] get the death penalty way disproportionately.”
Two groups immediately defended Paul – his supporters, and commentators on the Left. The former support anything Paul says; and the Left supports anything that Paul says that portrays America as ugly (see, for example, the defense of Paul by Left-wing USAToday columnist Dwayne Wickham, whose columns are regularly devoted to how much blacks suffer from American racism).
Just last month,Paul was asked by a representative of an organization (WeAreChange) that holds the government responsible for 9-11, “Why won’t you come out about the truth about 9/11?”
Paul’s response: “Because I can’t handle the controversy: I have the IMF, the Federal Reserve to deal with, the IRS to deal with.Because I just have more-too many things on my plate. Because I just have too much to do.” It is readily available on YouTube.
Whatever the implication of his cryptic response, when Paul is confronted by the mainstream media he denies that he believes the American government was involved in the 9-11 attacks. But what is undeniable is that Paul, like much of the Left, holds America largely responsible for 9-11 because of its foreign policy: its “occupying” countries all over the world, the sanctions on Saddam Hussein’s Iraq which Paul and the Left claim killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, the injustices against Palestinians that America has supported (through its support of Israel), etc.
He mocks the idea that the primary reason for 9-11 was that people of great evil attacked a very good country – because this is what the evil do, just as they did on the December 7, 1941 when the Japanese regime attacked Pearl Harbor. (more…)
Presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Republican, shakes hands with Army Cpl. Jesse Thorsen during his January caucus night rally, in Ankeny, Iowa. Mr. Paul has been getting extensive campaign-contribution support from enlisted people and civilians in the military, far exceeding his GOP rivals for the nomination. (Associated Press)