People Win ?

frasier

Insert comments here!!
Jul 19, 2006
3,377
0
0
In your head
Hardly anyone predicted that the Bush-Kennedy-Kyl-Reid steamroller could be stopped. But as the New York Times reported on page one, the "Grass Roots Roared, and an Immigration Plan Fell."

The American people are fed up with the six years of "silent amnesty" President Bush has given us by his refusal to enforce the laws against illegal entry into our country, against hiring illegal aliens, and against allowing visitors to overstay their visas. The American people demanded that Congress reject the 400-plus-page bill that would grant Z visas to make Bush's silent amnesty permanent.

The grass roots showed their power over the White House, Big Democratic Establishment, Big Republican Establishment, Big Business, Big Unions, Big Media, and Big Church combined. Let's consider just one (largely unreported) of the many terrible proposals hidden in the crevices of the unlamented Kennedy-Kyl immigration bill: a surreptitious attempt to convert us to a bilingual (or even multilingual) nation.

Section 702(b) would have forbidden the government to "diminish" any existing rights under U.S. "laws" that concern services or materials provided by the government "in any language other than English." This section was given extraordinary scope by Section 702, which defined the word "laws" to include "Presidential Executive Orders."

These deviously written sections would thus have exalted Clinton's Executive Order (EO) 13166 to the status of U.S. law. Clinton's order requires all recipients of federal funds to provide all information and services in any language requested by any recipient of federal funds (such as a private-practice physician who accepts a Medicare or Medicaid patient).
Ergo, all applicants for the new Z visa could apply in any language of their choice. Applicants would even be provided with tax-paid attorneys to demand their Z visas and challenge any rejection.

Clinton's EO 13166 should be repealed and English should be legislated as our official U.S. language. A new Zogby survey reports that 84 percent of Americans support this, one of the highest percentages of yes votes ever recorded in public opinion polls.
CNN's televised presidential debates highlighted the chasm between the two parties on this issue. When Wolf Blitzer asked all the Democratic candidates "to raise your hand ... if you believe English should be the official language of the United States," only former Sen. Mike Gravel held up his hand.

A few nights later at the Republican presidential debate, Blitzer asked any candidate to speak up "who doesn't believe English should be the official language of the United States." Only Sen. John McCain spoke, hedging his reply by talking about the sovereignty of American Indians in Arizona.

Blitzer followed up with the question "is there anyone else who stands with Sen. McCain specifically on that question?" No Republican candidate responded. A good example of the effect of NOT legislating English as our official language can be seen in the June 22 release of the U.S. Department of Agriculture about the school lunch program. I quote verbatim:

"Please be advised that we have finalized the process of translating the Free and Reduced Price School Meals Application package into 25 different languages . . . Arabic, Cambodian, Chinese (Mandarin), Farsi, French, Greek, Haitian, Hindi, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Kurdish, Laotian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Samoan, Serbo-Croatian, Somali, Spanish, Sudanese, Tagalog, Thai, Urdu, and Vietnamese."

(Note the discrimination of this list: it omits German and Italian. Does this mean that (a) German and Italian immigrants see to it that their kids learn English, or (b) we no longer accept immigrants from Germany or Italy, or we are still angry at Germany and Italy about World War II?)


Univision, the nation's most-watched Spanish-language television network, has announced it wants to host a Spanish-language TV debate among the 2008 presidential candidates. After specifying that all questions would be asked in Spanish, Univision condescendingly said that candidates may either answer in Spanish or use a translator if they answer in English.

Republican National Committee Chairman Mel Martinez says this is a "terrific" idea. Martinez is part of the reason why contributions to the Republican Party have dropped so low that the party has laid off all its telephone solicitors. The Univision invitation illustrates why it is important to recognize English as our official language. Since only citizens may legally vote, and being able to speak English is a requirement for naturalization, there is no necessity for candidates to speak to voters in any language other than English.

When a candidate uses a language other than English (as Mitt Romney is now doing in radio ads), it's like whispering behind the backs of most voters. This is unacceptable because the candidate may be making promises or concessions or innuendoes to a minority bloc, and because the process tends to divide the electorate into political pressure groups.

The English language is the greatest force we have for national unity. It would be a tragic mistake to diminish

Interesting
 
If America ever falls victim to the bi or multilingual death trap that will be the beginning of the end.

Farking trewdough screwed us over, seems the average American has stood up for themselves.

Good on 'em.
 
LancsLad said:
If America ever falls victim to the bi or multilingual death trap that will be the beginning of the end.

Farking trewdough screwed us over, seems the average American has stood up for themselves.

Good on 'em.

California is bilingual, in case you haven't noticed.
 
LancsLad said:
Not something they like either.
says who?

I actually lived in California and never even heard anybody gripe about it. Of course, it is not mandatory to the extent it is in Ontario, and it is a lot more natural, because of all the spanish speaking people. Not like in Ontario, where I have yet to be addressed in french.

You really cannot compare California and Canada in that sense. French is localized to Quebec.
 
danmand said:
California is bilingual, in case you haven't noticed.

They also have 5 classifications for gender on government forms.

OTB
 
frasier said:
I've learned from the best...
BTW do you have an opinion on this ..?

He's checking the Democratic Underground talking points, he'll get right back to you.

This is a hard issue (like education and aids funding) for the liberals, Bush is on their side of this but they hate him more than they believe in the issue....

OTB
 
onthebottom said:
He's checking the Democratic Underground talking points, he'll get right back to you.

This is a hard issue (like education and aids funding) for the liberals, Bush is on their side of this but they hate him more than they believe in the issue....

OTB

You know you gotta give him that...he knows where to find those talking points..while I have managed to dig up a few rightwing sites he seem to have and endless supply from his side of the fence...you got to admire his resourcefulness..

Note to TOV...don't let it get in to your head..I am still digging...
 
frasier said:
You know you gotta give him that...he knows where to find those talking points..while I have managed to dig up a few rightwing sites he seem to have and endless supply from his side of the fence...you got to admire his resourcefulness..

Note to TOV...don't let it get in to your head..I am still digging...


I figure I am with you on this one.

Let's get on our brown shirts and go door to door looking for illegals. Perhaps we can round them up and put them on boxcars and send them off someplace. Or maybe we can make them all wear little badges, yellow maybe. Twelve million of them. The possibilities are endless.

I got that from reading the National Review, BOT. I know you never go there to get any of the stuff you post. /snark
 
TOVisitor said:
Oh do they?

Maybe I missed the "LOL."


Well let's explore it. Male, Female, Transgender, Transsexual, Gay.

I am sure you can fall into one or more of them
 
One possible source for frasier's post.

It amazes me how often posters claim they're interested in discussion and ignore the most basic principles of debate, like attributing your quotations. I was taught an unattributed quote is arguing at the juvenile level of 'well everybody knows …' or 'they say …', so perhaps it's just that they don't respect their sources, or the points they think they're making.
 
oldjones said:
One possible source for frasier's post.

It amazes me how often posters claim they're interested in discussion and ignore the most basic principles of debate, like attributing your quotations. I was taught an unattributed quote is arguing at the juvenile level of 'well everybody knows …' or 'they say …', so perhaps it's just that they don't respect their sources, or the points they think they're making.

Tell him what he won....

i don't see the pont in posting sources, to what purpose would you want to post them anyway..so some of you can attack the source?
Most of the sources here posted are mainly liberal blogs with their own agenda..I'll take them at that and consider the content.
most of my posts come from townhall or redstate.com. I never even knew about those sites until about four weeks ago.
I'll started posting from them as a counter balance to TOV's consistent barrage of blog postings that are heavily left.
My main news source is in general NPR which i listen to on my way to work...
 
TOVisitor said:
Still not telling us where you get the stuff that you post?

Ashamed, perhaps?
Not ashamed i just don't feel it is relevant for my purpose...