by Juan Lee
Fue el primer gobernador’s debate en espaol . Un pas, dos langhuages – un mal plan. Debate en espaol enva el mensaje equivocado a los californianos. Ingls es el language nacional y tenemos que aprender Ingls. Hablando en espaol slo nos divide y nos hace ms dbiles . El voto hispano es importante, pero esto no es el camino.
It was an historic Spanish language only debate designed to win the votes of people who speak Spanish. And I have to wonder why, just how many voters could there be who use Spanish as their first language? I recognize there are probably a million illegal’s that do, but are they voting? I hope not, but Meg and Jerry must think so because they are sure making a play for them.
The debate was co-sponsored by Radio Bilinge and Univision (Spanish language television) broadcast from Fresno State’s Satellite Student Union.
The timing and the audience was the perfect setup for Jerry Brown who is making the most out out of Whitman’s firing of an illegal alien, Niki Diaz Santillan, her former housekeeper for nine years. Whitman terminated her employment when she discovered Diaz Santillan was in the country illegally. Diaz Santillan countered by accusing Whitman of throwing her away “Like so much garbage”. High priced celebrity attorney and media whore, Gloria Allred, has been representing Diaz Santillan interests as she makes the talk show rounds to pound on Whitman.
Whitman had been making inroads for the Hispanic vote until this scandal happened, now she’s on the defensive and to Brown’s delight, it’s keeping her from getting her message out. The Diaz Santillan flap has strong political overtones within the pro-immigration Hispanic society and it’s helped draw a clear line between her and Jerry Brown who touted he was a Caesar Chavez supporter and helped form the first farm worker labor unions.
Despite Whitman’s catering to Latinos and Latinas visa vi her denouncing of Arizona’s immigration law, being against California’s formers prop 187 to curb illegal immigration…she’s now seen as a hard liner on immigration. She sold out Arizona and she sold out California with her moderate immigration stance and her double-speak, being both for and against illegal immigration depending on the audience she was addressing. That has now backfired and she’s lost points on both sides and it serves her right.
Over 30% of the votes to be cast in the November election will come from the Latino population. Bienvenido a la Nueva California.
“I have to wonder why, just how many voters could there be who use Spanish as their first language?”
“Over 30% of the votes to be cast in the November election will come from the Latino population.”
It seems you answered your own question.
Mark…30% Latino verses how many speak Spanish as their first language should not be assumed to be anywhere near the same. Many 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th generation Hispanics do not even speak Spanish. This is more for the most recent immigrants and the majority of the most recent are likely not here legally. So I wonder whats up with catering to Spanish speakers in a California election…we speak English here and when in Rome…
PS You wouldn’t assume all black people speak eBonics would you? : )
Jack,
You appear to be obsessed with illegal immigrants, and now you are climbing on the english only bus. No wonder your party keeps losing elections in California.
Many fifth generation Hispanics do not speak Spanish, but they know when someone else is speaking it, and they like it because they know the message is intended for them.
Mark, to say I am obsessed is a bit strong since I just took this issue from the news yesterday. A whole lot of people were talking about it because it was a big first for California!
It was also more than just news worthy it was talk show worthy (several discussed it yesterday just like PS). Every now and then the subject of English being our official language comes up. We often discuss how it serves a greater purpose in being a unifying force in a multicultural society, unlike some European countries that suffer from more than one language.
The conservative side in California, and probably conservatives across America, have always taken the stance that we need to keep English as our spoken language at all levels of society because it serves unity and understanding. To have a governors debate done in Spanish is only problematic in that it sends a mixed message that we are two societies, two languages and we have to make special allowances because we are. Governors are supposed to be operating at one of the highest levels of representation and while it might be a good gimmick to cater to Hispanics for votes, its does so at the cost separating out those who not only speak English as their first language, but those who speak Chinese, Thai, Russian, etc., as their second language. It says Hispanics deserve more than you other two language speakers and that’s not right.
I oppose any election using a foreign language for one big reason: It is divisive!!!! English is our ONLY OFFICIAL LANGAUGE. When Mexico takes over around 2030 they can change it, but till then you’re stuck with English.
These very valid and widely held reasons for English only have apparently slipped by you. That happens a lot when folks live in Ivory Towers, but then thats why we’re here with our ladders, ready to bring you a dose of reality and I truly do appreciate this opportunity to do it. Muchas gracias senior Mark. Tenga un buen da! ; )
Jack: “Whitman terminated her employment when she discovered Diaz Santillan was in the country illegally. Diaz Santillan countered by accusing Whitman of throwing her away “Like so much garbage”.
And Whitman, who did what the law asked of her is vilified while the immigrant who lied to her is made a “victim”. The PC crowd makes Meg wrong whether or not she follows the law…she is damned one way or another. The illegal is given a pass and made a victim for presenting false documentation and being in the country without following the legal steps to get here. And PC progressive, liberal, nuts think you are “obsessed”?
Geez…I’d say it’s the PC crowd that is obsessed! Obsessed with making life “fair” for all the victims they can find (or create). It’s an arrogant position that assumes those so-called “victims” are helpless and unable to improve their own lives taking the consequences as they come.
For someone who promotes freedom, I find it strange that you do not understand the term.
Freedom of speech means you get to say what you want, in whatever language you want.
You appear to be obsessed, because everything makes you think of illegals. Everyone knows they can’t vote. No one that I have heard is saying they are. But you seem to think the Spanish language debate was somehow aimed at them.
You might want to see a professional about this.
Ivory towers beat padded rooms every time. : )
Mark, I understand e pluribus unum…perhaps you would like to change that to e pluribus duo? : )
Freedom works best when you have the good sense to know when and when not to use it.
So, one thing.
One language, one religion, one political party.
Is that it?
Vas ist vrong vit you you you swinehunt? Dast you nut see der advantages of habing vone supreme rular?
Just kidding…look its like this Mark…. e pluribus unum, the melting pot, united we stand-divided we fall, one nation under God, indivisible…, and this is not a new concept.
Just before 1776, there were no less than four dominent languages in various parts of the colonies, German, French, English and Dutch. It was resolved by consent, but never enacted by law, that English should be our national language, but it was almost German, it was a close vote imagine that? And to this day the United States still has NO Official language…we assume it’s English by our past practice, but in fact there is no law that says it is.
Now check this out and this particular bill was introduced in the House of Representatives as H.J. Res. 16 (107th Congress):
The English language shall be the official language of the United States. As the official language, the English language shall be used for all public acts including every order, resolution, vote, or election, and for all records and judicial proceedings of the Government of the United States and the governments of the several States.
Also introduced in the 107th Congress was this text from H.R. 3333:
The Government of the United States shall preserve and enhance the role of English as the official language of the United States of America. Unless specifically stated in applicable law, no person has a right, entitlement, or claim to have the Government of the United States or any of its officials or representatives act, communicate, perform or provide services, or provide materials in any language other than English. If exceptions are made, that does not create a legal entitlement to additional services in that language or any language other than English.
I think it’s really important that we stress English as our national language for those acts enumerated above and because this is a unifying force for diverse cultures.
Mark, our nations strength never came from diversity…sorry, but diversity unto itself is no virtue, our strength comes from our unity… in a common idealism about what free should be and how we should preserve and protect it.
Now Mark your comment about one language and then tossing in one religion and one political party is probably an attempt at being facetious, but you and I know that is not what this conversation is about it. It’s about unity and equality for strength and purpose. It’s about our assimilation into American society with a common understanding and appreciation for the founding principles. We don’t do that by creating cultures within a culture. Subcultures have always got the short end of the stick and it’s not be very helpful to the country either. It’s far better that we stand united by language, but by all means, speak all the other languages you can, its a wonderful gift for those who know more than one language!
I speak a tiny bit of Mandarin and Cantonese. I also speak some Russian, mostly just greetings and tourist type questions. My father was fluent in Portugeuse. I also enjoy French, Spanish and German and can rattle off some phrases in each…but far from fluent in any language beyond English, I wish I was! Why? Because when I travel its shows people who speak those languages as their native tongue that you care about them and you respect their customs..it’s a courtesy. I get it Mark, I truly do, but I still feel that it’s critically important to have English as our national language and we should conduct our politics and that means elections… in English only for the reasons previously stated.
Jack,
No where in the Constitution does it say you must speak English to be an American.
I am fine with all official government actions to be in English, since a foreigner must understand English to become a citizen, but that is not what you said.
Meg Whitman is not a public official. She can speak any language she wants, and no one should be able to force her otherwise. Brown should be allowed the same freedom, in the same context.
Since it is not a requirement to speak English to be an American that government warnings and directives also need to be available in all languages. I know it is expensive to do so, but as you often say, freedom has its price.
I have always believed that the lack of a national language has been an interesting part of the American experiment. A sign of our tolerance and ideals of embracing the best parts of other cultures and making them our own. When I look at the English-only movement, I see a lot of people who have previously expressed racist views. This makes me want to distance myself from them.
That said…
I don’t think support of English-only policies is inherently racist. In fact, I am starting to consider these policies. Working the check-out line at Wal-Mart in Fresno County has made me realize how many people in my little town do not speak any English at all. It usually doesn’t lead to problems, but it can be frustrating.
Would making government documents–including everything from welfare papers, to letters to parents from schools–English-only encourage non-English speakers to start learning the language? Or would this only cause more of a hardship?
After all, learning a new language is difficult. Still, maybe it would be less difficult than trying to get by in America without learning English.
But then that makes me wonder if I am trying to tell minorities what is best for them, which in itself can be racist.
Would we need to set up more government programs to help teach English to immigrants? Would the cost of this be more or less than printing documents in both languages?
Clearly there are benefits and drawbacks to the idea of one official language. The specter of racism, real or imaginary, is one of the issues on the table in this debate, but it shouldn’t be the only one. Let’s talk about this practically.
Mark you’re losing me (yo no se and I have to say that more and more these days) I just said I didn’t like our elections being done in one foreign language because it is divisive and caters to a minority over other minorities, you keep adding stuff. When did I say the Constitution mandated you speak English to be an American? I even bought up that we DO NOT HAVE an OFFICAL LANGUAGE. However, now that you mention it, in order to become an American citizen the INS says you must speak our semi-official langauge – English. But, that is not the Constitution, we just made it a law by Congress. Which brings up a question for you, why is the Constitution in English, why didn’t we also have printed in Spanish, German and French, etc.,? Do you have any idea why? I’m sure we could have back then if our forefathers wanted too – so why didn’t they?
I think in our times that THE PRICE of FREEDFOM includes learning English so you can be part of the great melting pot, united in our idealism, not separated by our diverse backgrounds…and from many we are become one. Ya gotta love that part it makes me proud to be an American, how bout you?
“I just said I didn’t like our elections being done in one foreign language because it is divisive and caters to a minority over other minorities”
The election is in English. One debate was in Spanish. You said they did it to appeal to illegal immigrants.
Is it more divisive to say even one is too many, or to let it slide?