I have to hand it to Newt, he is an expert on ghettoes.
Cross Caligula and the home shopping channel and you get Newt.
Newt, bilingual ed and the PC police
By Tony Blankley
April 4, 2007
Last week my former boss, Newt Gingrich, threw a much-needed conceptual bomb into the jejune public dialogue of presidential aspirants. Amid the platitudes, banalities and evasions that constitute pre-presidential debate these days, Newt argued (in a speech last weekend) that bilingual education only encourages students to be linguistically "living in a ghetto:
"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Predictably, the PC riot squad screeched into the media to suppress such clarity of language. Peter Zamora, co-chairman of the Hispanic Education Coalition, intoned: "The tone of his comments were very hateful. Spanish is spoken by many individuals who do not live in the ghetto." CNN and other news outlets started raising the question had Newt gone too far this time?
But of course, there was nothing hateful in Newt's language or in his thoughts: Completely the contrary is the case. Newt has always sincerely wanted to help poor people and legal immigrants become successful, fully integrated American citizens.
Back in 1995 he was mocked for warning the public that inner-city kids would be left out of the computer-filled future if we didn't get computers into inner-city (largely black and Hispanic) schools just as suburban (largely white) parents were providing computers for their kids. Only years later did liberals recognize the very real danger of the socio-economic "digital divide" as a threat to poor kids. Newt was the first to notice the danger ?- and he was the first to try to actually do something about it.
Mr. Zamora and the others in the media who have pounced on Newt's mention of the ghetto either willfully or ignorantly misinterpret the significance of the ghetto reference. Originally, the word ghetto was used to describe that part of the city of Venice where Jews were required to live.
It wasn't the Jews' fault. It was the fault of the others who wanted to deny the Jews the right to live fully integrated lives. Of course, even in medieval times, Jews around the world spoke a noble, historic language. The fact that it was also spoken in the ghetto was no reflection on the language ?- but rather a reflection on the repressive culture in which many Jews were forced to live.
Likewise today, Spanish is a magnificent language proudly spoken by people around the world. But in the United States, while the language remains beautiful and noble, those Hispanic American children who are discouraged from learning English (by a bilingual policy that retards rather than advances the learning of English) are and will continue to be culturally and economically ghettoized by their inability to read, write and speak English.
It is not hateful of Newt to point that out. It is hateful of ideological "civil-rights" activists to try to intimidate any politician who would dare to liberate kids from the linguistic ghetto that serves the political power of these "civil-rights" activists. Once these kids have mastered English and fully entered American life they will no longer be vote-fodder for the "civil-rights" activists' political ambitions.
The special-interest ethnic activists prefer to have a new generation of clients, rather than a new generation of fully integrated American citizens. And what they fear is an honest and open debate on the bilingual teaching method.
Teaching in the native language (bilingual ed) combined with ballot measures and government and consumer information in the native language is establishing a dubious result today ?- as millions of immigrants are given just enough such linguistic help to let them function minimally in America (without learning English), but not enough to participate fully in our great country, economy and culture.
But there is a magnificent historic record for total immersion in English as the best pedagogic method of teaching immigrants English. During the great immigration waves of the 19th and early 20th centuries, peoples from the four corners of the world came by the millions to America ?- and within a generation were speaking English like native s and ready to reap the full benefits of American citizenship.
That is the objective that we must strive toward today. That is what Newt's recommendations are realistically aimed at realizing. Other major political figures should join the debate (making objective arguments on either side of the policy debate) ?- rather than being scared off by the hateful accusations of the cynical PC enforcement squads.
"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
woiyo wrote:"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
Blatham
You dont understand that its ok if your a godly republican. Its only wrong if your a goodless democrat.
Blatham
Quote:Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
The fact that he is a degenerate does not make him wrong about bi-lingual education. Millions came from all over the world and succeeded in turning out a better product than we have with it.
Necessity is a better motivator than indulgence
au1929 wrote:Blatham
Quote:Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
The fact that he is a degenerate does not make him wrong about bi-lingual education. Millions came from all over the world and succeeded in turning out a better product than we have with it.
Necessity is a better motivator than indulgence
Gingrich is an amoral and power-thirsting demagogue. He's as bad as american politics gets (he's smarter than McCarthy).
He is not expressing a rational argument here, he is merely counting on a deep vein of racism and xenophobia present in American culture to raise fears and hatred for his own political gain.
Canada, as you may know, is bilingual as a matter of law. I have not met a European who does not speak at least three languages fluently. Vancouver now is close to 50% of Asian descent and all the ATM machines, for example, have Mandarin as well as English while the can of peas you buy is french on one side and english on the other.
The quintessential comment by an American on this English matter was a Congresswoman from the last century who stated, "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me."
blatham wrote:woiyo wrote:"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
Or maybe 700 is the number of mindless post you make.
Bottom line is printing any US document in any number of languages more than 1 (english) is too many and a waste of my tax dollars.
woiyo wrote:blatham wrote:woiyo wrote:"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
Or maybe 700 is the number of mindless post you make.
Bottom line is printing any US document in any number of languages more than 1 (english) is too many and a waste of my tax dollars.
Well, if economic efficiency is your argument, very soon it will be the case that Spanish speakers outnumber English speakers. It follows as night follows day that you will then argue for the economic efficiencies of a single Spanish government document.
woiyo wrote:blatham wrote:woiyo wrote:"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
Or maybe 700 is the number of mindless post you make.
Bottom line is printing any US document in any number of languages more than 1 (english) is too many and a waste of my tax dollars.
Um, it doesn't cost any more money to print in a different language than it does English, yo.
The amount that we spend to print ADDITIONAL documents in foreign languages is negligible. And the gains to society are tremendous; do we or don't we want the most accurate results possible on documents filled out by our citizens? On voting?
Cycloptichorn
Bernie, I love that line about Jesus. May I have it?
Our government publishing in other languages is often self-serving. For instance, the IRS publishes a number of documents in Spanish, which urge the readers to file returns, and instructs them on how to do this. The IRS feels it is important to get, and keep, these people in the system.
On another matter, I thought for a while that the Republicans had, for perhaps the first time, a moronless field of candidates. After listening to McCain's statements while in Iraq, I changed my mind.
Cycloptichorn wrote:woiyo wrote:blatham wrote:woiyo wrote:"The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly show up to vote... The American people believe English should be the official language of the government... We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in the ghetto... Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that's true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English."
Could not agree any more with this.
Like that "700" figure up there. But it is a good round number and is, by coincidence, the same number of times Newt has told wives suffering cancer that its time for a divorce because he's humping his secretary.
Or maybe 700 is the number of mindless post you make.
Bottom line is printing any US document in any number of languages more than 1 (english) is too many and a waste of my tax dollars.
Um, it doesn't cost any more money to print in a different language than it does English, yo.
The amount that we spend to print ADDITIONAL documents in foreign languages is negligible. And the gains to society are tremendous; do we or don't we want the most accurate results possible on documents filled out by our citizens? On voting?
Cycloptichorn
What I want is an America that's has a specific culture that made us the great nation we are today. That means controlled immigration, common language, common culture.
this "diversity" trend is bullsh!t and an excuse to seperate people into groups rather than bring people together.
That's how we built this nation.
You are 100% wrong. The 'we' you discuss was an amalgam of people from many, many different cultures. There was no one group who 'built' this nation.
The strength of America has always been in our open nature, not in closing off and denying. I too believe that we need closed borders, but that has nothing to do with people speaking whatever language they like to speak.
Cycloptichorn
blatham wrote: Canada, as you may know, is bilingual as a matter of law. I have not met a European who does not speak at least three languages fluently. Vancouver now is close to 50% of Asian descent and all the ATM machines, for example, have Mandarin as well as English while the can of peas you buy is french on one side and english on the other.
It is interesting that you mention Vancouver and it's Asian population in your screed againt Gingrich. Vancouver's own Electoral Reform Commission determined that ballots must be printed using western characters.
"It is not certain whether multilingual ballots are permissible under the Charter. It is at least arguable that the Charter's requirement that names be listed alphabetically suggests that names on ballots must employ the Western alphabet. Several speakers at our public meetings
have suggested that multilingual ballots would increase participation of minority groups in political life.
I think, however, the advantages of multilingual ballots are outweighed by the problems that might be associated with them.
Given that only citizens of Canada have a right to vote, it can be expected that the overwhelming majority of voters, immigrants and otherwise, will have acquired facility with the English language."
http://www.city.vancouver.bc.ca/erc/pdf/verc_report.pdf (page 122)
So yes, they can be multilingual - as long as that other language uses the western character set. I wonder how much that helps that Asian polulation in Vancouver?
It is also interesting to note that in a footnote on the bottom of that same page they mention
"Section 5(1)(d) of the federal Citizenship Act requires that the citizenship applicant possess an adequate knowledge of one of the official languages of Canada. The associated Regulations say that the applicant should be able to comprehend basic spoken statements and questions in past, present and future tenses."
How dare Gingrich suggest that the U.S. have a similar requirement! And shame on those Canadians for being so racist and xenophobic!
The diversity movement is BS. It divides people, and even celebrates their differences. The USA got great because it was a melting pot, which included a common language and, in general, common goals and interests.
When you look around the world where there are distinctly different languages you often find strife. In Quebec, language issues have to some degree separated the province from the rest of Canada, and has been costly. There have been problems, and some riots, in Belgium between those who want to speak French and those who prefer Dutch. There are many other places with similar problems.
And don't forget Italy. And Spain. And Luxembourg. And Switzerland. If they had only started to mandate one language, one culture and one nation under...
Anyways. They could be so successful. Instead, they choose multiculturalism.
Cycloptichorn wrote:You are 100% wrong. The 'we' you discuss was an amalgam of people from many, many different cultures. There was no one group who 'built' this nation.
The strength of America has always been in our open nature, not in closing off and denying. I too believe that we need closed borders, but that has nothing to do with people speaking whatever language they like to speak.
Cycloptichorn
Wrong AGAIN.
This nation was built by people who came here TO BE AN AMERICAN. They WANTED to blend into our culture and speak out language.
Except for MY forefathers (who had their land taken from them), every single one of your ancestors came from somewhere else to BE AN AMERICAN.
Many, and ALL the illegals, are coming here to be in America. There is a big difference (which apparently you can not grasp).
woiyo wrote:This nation was built by people who came here TO BE AN AMERICAN. They WANTED to blend into our culture and speak out language.
Really? But what about, let's say, the Amish? Did they want to be Americans? Did they want to blend into
the culture? Did they want to speak English? And today, would you say they are less American than you are, woiyo? What about the Italians? Many American cities which have a distinctly Italian quarter. Did the Italians really want to be Americans? Did they want to blend into the culture, and want to speak English? Or what about the famous Chinatown parts of so many cities. You see nothing but Chinese street signs, shop signs... even the subway signs are Chinese. Would you say these people wanted to be Americans, blend into the culture and speak English? If your answer would be no, would you say that they are less American than you are?
