FIRST A2K STRAW POLL White House 2008

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?

We're not talking about the "Chinatowns" and "Little Italy's" et al that crop up in the cities. There are a lot of towns throughout the midwest and elsewhere made up of descendants of immigrants primarily of one place or another whether they are Irish or Swedes or Germans or Chechs. Kansas alone has dozens of little communities like this. Most have annual old country festivals and they are great fun. Every one of these little communities is as American as any American place can be however. It is natural that people of shared experience and language congregate together during the assimilation process. And this does result in neighborhoods or little towns with strong ethnic flavors. It in no way diminishes them as Americans.
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2557384#2557384

Even the SIGN on the picture you posted say it IN ENGLISH!!!

"DIVERSITY" has killed the European culture

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.

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!

I'm going with Rudy for now. If he ends up running against Obama in the general election, then I'll vote for Obama. I can't see voting in the Democratic primary in IL. Obama will take it in a landslide. I'd rather make a difference on the Republican side.

You argument is idiotic. Even the SIGN on the picture you posted say it IN ENGLISH!!!

These neighborhoods you describe and even the Reservation my Mother lived , places where immigrants could feel comfortable since the neighbors shared a common experience

and came here to blend into the American Culture.

Yet, all business transactions are conducted in ENGLISH,

children go to PUBLIC SCHOOLS

and want to "be like everyone else".

"DIVERSITY" has killed the European culture and it is beginning to happen in AMERICA nad we need to stop it.

As I posted some time back in the immigration thread:

Quote:

We're not talking about the "Chinatowns" and "Little Italy's" et al that crop up in the cities. There are a lot of towns throughout the midwest and elsewhere made up of descendants of immigrants primarily of one place or another whether they are Irish or Swedes or Germans or Chechs. Kansas alone has dozens of little communities like this. Most have annual old country festivals and they are great fun. Every one of these little communities is as American as any American place can be however. It is natural that people of shared experience and language congregate together during the assimilation process. And this does result in neighborhoods or little towns with strong ethnic flavors. It in no way diminishes them as Americans.
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2557384#2557384

In 1995, for example, he said bilingualism poses ''long-term dangers to the fabric of our nation'' and that ''allowing bilingualism to continue to grow is very dangerous.''

Wonderful, we need to stress diversity so we can have all those charming Chinese and other ghettoes. They are so much fun.

Foxfyre wrote:

As I posted some time back in the immigration thread:

Quote:

We're not talking about the "Chinatowns" and "Little Italy's" et al that crop up in the cities. There are a lot of towns throughout the midwest and elsewhere made up of descendants of immigrants primarily of one place or another whether they are Irish or Swedes or Germans or Chechs. Kansas alone has dozens of little communities like this. Most have annual old country festivals and they are great fun. Every one of these little communities is as American as any American place can be however. It is natural that people of shared experience and language congregate together during the assimilation process. And this does result in neighborhoods or little towns with strong ethnic flavors. It in no way diminishes them as Americans.
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2557384#2557384

Great. Then there would be nothing wrong with "Little Mexico's" either, right? Can we all accept that?

old europe wrote:

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?

You argument is idiotic. Even the SIGN on the picture you posted say it IN ENGLISH!!!

These neighborhoods you describe and even the Reservation my Mother lived , places where immigrants could feel comfortable since the neighbors shared a common experience and came here to blend into the American Culture. Yet, all business transactions are conducted in ENGLISH, children go to PUBLIC SCHOOLS and want to "be like everyone else".

"DIVERSITY" has killed the European culture and it is beginning to happen in AMERICA nad we need to stop it.

So why do opponents of official English continue to use "English-only"? Because it is a loaded term that conveys exclusivity and an implied feeling of linguistic superiority. For that reason it is divisive and can be upsetting to people whose native language is not English. Its misuse is intended to provoke an emotional reaction and subtly demonize anyone who favors making English our official language, as well as those who simply want to protect its role as the common language of the United States.

So, if all this is true what does the term "official English" mean? It means that a government has decided that in order for its actions, laws, and business to be considered authoritative, they must be communicated in the English language. It means that there can be no disagreement about which language is the controlling one for discerning the meaning that government intends. And it means that absent a broad, public interest reason for using another language, the default language of government operations is English.

Official English also has a symbolic meaning, which is very important. It sends a message to all those who want to participate as citizens in this great nation, that there are responsibilities as well as benefits for being here. And one of those responsibilities is learning to speak the language of our country--English. There is no reason why our expectations for non-English speaking immigrants today should be less than our expectations for the generations of immigrants that preceded them.
http://www.proenglish.org/notenglishonly.html