US mid-term elections and the political divide

Message

dsigma6 · #61 Post by **dsigma6** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:19 am

Are we ready for Nancy "Hate to be her Husband" Pelosi?

JHEM · #62 Post by **JHEM** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:11 am

dsigma6 wrote:Are we ready for Nancy "Hate to be her Husband" Pelosi?

Education before castigation Dan!

James

dsigma6 · #63 Post by **dsigma6** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:52 am

JHEM wrote: Education before castigation Dan!

James

I didn't mean to chastise...My comment is based on my view of her attitude. I forgot the "IMHO" disclaimer.

pphilipko · #64 Post by **pphilipko** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:18 pm

As for the debate about language, I believe language is so closely tied to culture that people use language as a weapon in cultural conflict and political strife. Here in the US, where the "minority" populations are increasing, e.g. Spanish, some Spanish speakers and their advocates demand the use of Spanish in public affairs.

There are some people opposed to such policies (there seems to be an influx of them here!), and lead counter movements to promote "official English" policies, where English would be the official language of the government. Personally, I think it's wrong to force people to learn a new language. Some find it difficult and seemingly impossible, especially those in their late 40's and 50's. Just imagine yourself trying to master Russian or Chinese. Rather than follow the "assimilation" colonial policies of the past, we should be more open minded. Granted, around 25 States today have declared English the official language by statute or amending the State constitution. However, there are still some states which have passed English-plus laws, encouraging bilingualism for non English speakers, and a few other states are even officially bilingual, such as Hawaii (Hawaiian and English) and New Mexico (Spanish and English).

Rather than trying eliminate foreign cultures by trying to enforce English only policies and "americanizing" everyone, we should just accept other languages and make it easier for immigrants to adjust to our environment. Stop rejecting other cultures as inferior and locking down every crack from the rest of the world. I believe the Bush government is becoming increasingly isolationist, blocking all immigrants, and some are even attempting to remove all the immigrants from our country (both legal and illegal). If we were to remove every single illegal immigrant from the country, we would suffer the consequences of a major economic, not to mention cultural, slump.

The United States constantly reminds me of other countries' histories...when a country starts closing its doors from the rest of the world, it decays and stagnates into oblivion. We now seem to be following the same path; we lock down our country, build fences, and keep everything out, whether it be people, culture, or goods. (e.g. removal of Lenovo computers from US government, and the customs "delays" of consumer thinkpads)

Clare Swan, an elder in the Kenaitze band of the Dena'ina First Nations in Alaska, eloquently describes the role of language in culture:

"No one was allowed to speak the language - the Dena'ina language. They [the American government] didn't allow it in schools, and a lot of the women had married non-native men, and the men said, 'You're American now so you can't speak the language.' So, we became invisible in the community. Invisible to each other. And, then, because we couldn't speak the language - what happens when you can't speak your own language is you have to think with someone else's words, and that's a dreadful kind of isolation."

dsigma6 · #65 Post by **dsigma6** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:41 pm

A couple things:

1. Granted it's Arizona and not New Mexico, a ballot question posed to voters: Make English Official Lanugage...74% voted yes. That could make it the 26th state with its own legislation making English the official language.

2. Bob Menendez (Dem. NJ) gave part of his acceptance speech in Spanish. Considering the breakdown of who voted for him, I consider it a clear insult to the English speaking majority that elected the criminal (IMHO/many others).

With the ousting of Rummy, hopefully we will become a bit more united.

pphilipko · #66 Post by **pphilipko** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:37 pm

I think you're still missing the point here, dsigma8. How is making part of his acceptance speech in Spanish "criminal"? He just wants to use Spanish to keep his language and culture alive. I don't consider that criminal or insulting at all. Try to be more open, and accept all languages and cultures. After all, he didn't JUST speak Spanish.

And your first point doesn't seem to be valid. There still remains the problem of culture assimilation, which needs to be addressed. If you're thinking that a slight majority of all the states in the US means that it's the correct choice, you may be mistaken. A majority voted for Bush...twice.

Also, athough approximately 25 states voted for English as it's official language, there are still countless other places where such votes have failed. As I mentioned previously, there are some who have made their states bilingual, such as Hawaii. (the best choice, in my opinion).

dsigma6 · #67 Post by **dsigma6** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:43 pm

pphilipko wrote:dsigma8

Something like that..

I never stated, implied...whatever...that his use of the Spanish language had anything to be with his possible criminal activity.

edit: As to multilingual states, what percentage of Hawaiians speaking English, VS. those speaking native languages? I imagine it would be higher than, say, Pennsylvania. I don't know the demographics or anything, but I imagine a majority should not have to conform to a second language, only to make those people happy.

#68 Post by **Kyocera** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:07 pm

Try getting Hawaii to switch to Spanish as their second/first language and watch the [censored] hit the fan. Wonder if they are forcing mexicans in mexico to speak English, or are they gladly learning a few words for their trip across the border. It's all politically correct el crapola.

JHEM · #69 Post by **JHEM** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:08 pm

pphilipko wrote:Here in the US, where the "minority" populations are increasing, e.g. Spanish, some Spanish speakers and their advocates demand the use of Spanish in public affairs.

Why? Do they feel their constituents are too stupid to learn english? [/intentional barb!]

Seriously Phil, millions and millions of immigrants have come to the USA speaking languages other than english and yet they and their families assimilated successfully AND learned english.

James

pphilipko · #70 Post by **pphilipko** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:45 pm

Actually, they want to retain their language, and thus their cultural identity. However, James, I agree with you that they should learn at least some English when they come to the US. I just don't want them to lose their identity when they actually do. Too many immigrants, especially those from Japan and other parts of Asia, are beginning to lose their cultural roots, which I find quite unfortunate.

I don't want them to lose their cultural identity and heritage. I want to retain all that they brought with them, and to infuse their culture with our culture. Removing their culture and essentially telling them that ours is superior is downright wrong, in my opinion.

Assimilation: that's the key. Immigrants should learn about our language and culture, but they surely should not give up their own!

#71 Post by **GomJabbar** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:29 pm

"Resistance is futile — you will be assimilated."

Seriously though......... although I feel that it is the immigrants obligation to learn English to get along in this country, IMO there is nothing wrong with politicos using Spanish (or any other language) to get their point across to the non-English speaking populace. I also have no problem with non-English signs on storefronts and other places in ethnic neighborhoods. Posting signs in various languages in high travel areas such as airports and subways makes things run smoother. Also, on certain common, necessary, legal documents, I believe it is helpful to have other common language versions available. It is possible the immigrant hasn't been in this country long enough to fully understand what the document is about.

However, I must admit frustration with the immigrants who have lived in this country for a number of years, and have not taken it upon themselves to learn the native language - English. If I decided to live in a country whose primary language was not English, I would take it upon myself to learn that language as quickly as possible.

FTR, I married an immigrant who is fluent in English as well as her native language. She did not begin to learn English until she arrived here at the age of 17. She is currently attending a university to advance her career in the medical field.

Manarius · #72 Post by **Manarius** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:31 pm

JHEM has basically written anything and everything I would have written here. I do have to mention though that I support building a huge wall between here and Mexico and deporting every illegal immigrant.

I also pro-choice and stem-cells. Not so sure about same-sex marriage.

I also think that government size should be far less than what it is now so where does that put me?

#73 Post by **Kyocera** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:03 pm

The United States constantly reminds me of other countries' histories...when a country starts closing its doors from the rest of the world, it decays and stagnates into oblivion. We now seem to be following the same path; we lock down our country, build fences, and keep everything out, whether it be people, culture, or goods

Whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy

JHEM · #74 Post by **JHEM** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:00 pm

Manarius wrote:I also think that government size should be far less than what it is now so where does that put me?

Right alongside me and Thomas Paine: "That government is best which governs least."

James

christopher_wolf · #75 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:13 pm

JHEM wrote:
Manarius wrote:I also think that government size should be far less than what it is now so where does that put me?
Right alongside me and Thomas Paine: "That government is best which governs least."

James

Oh yes, indeed. Less government, provided they are at least moderately clever, works far better than more government.

#76 Post by **K. Eng** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:35 pm

Well it looks like moderate Democrats had a run of the House and Senate this time around. I hope they use this opportunity well.

As for the Republicans, I think the lesson here is that bullsh*t doesn't sell. Corruption doesn't sell. Looking out for oneself (read: taking $ from lobbyists like Jack Abramoff) doesn't sell.

dsigma6 · #77 Post by **dsigma6** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:45 pm

Manarius wrote: I also think that government size should be far less than what it is now

When Republicans took over in '94, wasn't their initial goal to make the government smaller, since the Dems were adding to the problem?

As to Republicans learning that lesson...It's a stupid, repetitious system. The Dems will screw up, the GOP will screw up some more, never ending and always worse (perceivably) than the last screw up.

#78 Post by **AlphaKilo470** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:54 pm

I think a major key to creating a good politician is to have him know every minute that his job is in check. Unfortunately, with an increasingly apathetic population and rising numbers of non-voters, the politicians are feeling too secure for their own good which is what leads to the various scandals we hear about on the news. At this point, while I would have preferred a republican congress, I beleive that just so long as the right decisions are made, this can be pulled for the best. As for leadership changes, they are merely in a cycle and at this point in time, the cycle is spun in a favorable direction for the democrats. We'll probably see republicans become popular again next decade which will then be likely followed with a comeback by the democrats and so on.

JHEM · #79 Post by **JHEM** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:35 pm

dsigma6 wrote:When Republicans took over in '94, wasn't their initial goal to make the government smaller, since the Dems were adding to the problem?

Back in '94 the Democrats WERE the problem!

But so were the Republicans, and their conceptions of how to "fix" the system were far worse than the status quo.

With all the acrimony and mud-slinging evident in this most recent demonstration of our political process, one would certainly think that more Americans could have torn themselves away from the boob tune, gotten off their wide-load asses and actually voted.

The latest figures show that perhaps 42% of all registered voters took advantage of this opportunity to engender change in the administration of our nation and how we are perceived by the rest of the world.

To what do we ascribe this low turnout? Apathy? Indifference? Simple ignorance?

Failure to exercise a muscle leads to weakening and the same thing can happen to our right to vote.

It's ironic that the last election in Iraq showed more than a 70% turnout, and that was when voting could get you killed.

People get the government they deserve.

James

Website · #80 Post by **tfflivemb2** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:51 am

JHEM wrote:People get the government they deserve.

As much as I hate to take part in political/religious debates, I am going to call you on the carpet on this one.

I don't think that it is fair to lay out such a blanket statement. Unfortunately, many people in other countries are uneducated on how the system could work with the voting process, based on the history of government control in their country. They could have been uneducated as the result of poverty, or limited access to information based on that same govermental control over televisions channels and radio stations. (ie. no free speech)

No one deserves a government that mistreats them, or has no regard for human life.

In the US, I would find your statement to be true. We all have the right to vote and control who leads our Nation. If we elect someone and it turns out that they are not doing what they agreed to do, we have the ability, as a whole, to do something about it. If we don't do something about it, then it is our own fault. Granted, it is still a majority rules decision, but if enough people (ie. more than 50%) truly disagree with the government, or president, then do something about it and stop complaining.

JHEM · #81 Post by **JHEM** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:23 am

tfflivemb2 wrote:
JHEM wrote:People get the government they deserve.
As much as I hate to take part in political/religious debates, I am going to call you on the carpet on this one.

Fair enough Steve. How about "Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve"?

James

Manarius · #82 Post by **Manarius** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:41 pm

dsigma6 wrote:As to Republicans learning that lesson...It's a stupid, repetitious system. The Dems will screw up, the GOP will screw up some more, never ending and always worse (perceivably) than the last screw up.

The problem moreover lies in the fact that today's Republicans are Neo-Conservatives. They rejoice in big government and big stick methodology. These Neo-Cons have given regular conservatives a bad name. Regular conservatives, like Ronald Reagan for example, are here for the deconstruction of the convoluted system of bureaucracy. The Neo-Cons just add to that convoluted system and somehow justify it by things like 9/11. I bet Reagan is rolling over in his grave every time some neo-con calls him/herself conservative.

Most people in America, I would be willing to bet, want the government to stay out of their personal lives and just manage keeping us from getting invaded and taxes.

skitty4gzus · #83 Post by **skitty4gzus** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:32 pm

Well, this is my opinion on a few things which i believe to be fact. For starters your right, the declaration is made up of a key sentence. "In God We Trust". Take that and lets go to the bible and see what He has to say on things. Well for one it says that a marriage is a union between 1 man and 1 woman. Thats enough said on that. I am more than happy with the job that pres Bush has been doing. Yes he's not perfect, either is anyone else, but at least he has got what it takes to back up what he says and take care of business. Do you think 9/11 is the worst thing to happen to the U.S.? Get real. You let an act of terrorism like that go unpunished and it only gets worse from there on out. Also, it says in the bible the Lord has set aside a nation of God which I believe to be the U.S. With that we are to protect those who are not strong enough to protect themselves, take for instance the Iraq situation. And, to add to that, I hope there is a pres. in charge when folks out west decide to make a huge mistake and go after Israel. Im proud to be an American and Im proud of my uncle who is the majority leader in the House of Rep. I pray for him that he makes good decisions and represents the nation in an honorable way. Now I dont think its right for any immigrant to sneak into our nation and "fat" off our economy and take up our precious jobs. But for those who honestly are heading here for a better life than I say give them a chance. No, I don't believe in letting the majority make decisions for the minority, or "deciding" on who is to be the minority. But, if folks choose to make poor decisions, unconsitutional decisions, and unGodly decisions than they have no choice to make themselves to be the minority. Not all change is wrong or bad and if it is actually correct and good for mankind than it will eventually be accepted. Gay marriage should never be accepted and in my eyes and in the Lord's eyes things like this are only leading down the road of desctruction. If you think that is crazy or just paranoia take a look at the dowslide of this nation over the last say 40 years or so. Taking the 10 commandments down and God out of our schools has been a monumental mistake. Well there ya go, go ahead and flame all over this!

#84 Post by **Kyocera** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:55 pm

Way to go

skitty.

Manarius · #85 Post by **Manarius** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 5:59 pm

Hey skitty, I busted out my copy of the Declaration and couldn't find a single "In God We Trust" bit.

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm

I also busted out my copy of the Constitution and looked at Amendment 1:

The Constitution wrote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Last time I checked, that means congress can't write laws with a certain religion in mind...so throw out your marriage idea 'cause that's illegal. Not to mention a federal law about it breaks amendment 10 as well.

I'm a Christian at a Private Christian College and I believe that Religion has absolutely no place in politics. The government isn't here to legislate morals. It's here to keep us under control and from killing each other.

JHEM · #86 Post by **JHEM** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:12 pm

skitty4gzus wrote:Well there ya go, go ahead and flame all over this!

Nah. WAY too easy, like shooting fish in a barrel.

James

#87 Post by **K. Eng** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:22 pm

Assuming you really believe your post and are not a troll, I will address some of your points on the merits:

skitty4gzus wrote:Well, this is my opinion on a few things which i believe to be fact. For starters your right, the declaration is made up of a key sentence. "In God We Trust". Take that and lets go to the bible and see what He has to say on things. Well for one it says that a marriage is a union between 1 man and 1 woman. Thats enough said on that.

This argument fails on several grounds. First and formost, the Declaration of Independence is not legally binding any more than the Articles of Confederation are binding. It is not part of the Constitution, and it is not a statute or regulation. The United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land (see Article VI, Section 2).

Second, even if the Declaration did say "In God We Trust," which it does not, the phrase could reasonably be interpreted as not commanding obedience to the Christian bible.

Do you think 9/11 is the worst thing to happen to the U.S.? Get real. You let an act of terrorism like that go unpunished and it only gets worse from there on out.

I agree insofar as Afghanistan is concerned. Iraq, however, had nothing to do with 9/11. No Iraqi citizens participated in the 9/11 attacks.

If you think that is crazy or just paranoia take a look at the dowslide of this nation over the last say 40 years or so. Taking the 10 commandments down and God out of our schools has been a monumental mistake. Well there ya go, go ahead and flame all over this!

The U.S. has had its ups and downs, but I'd hardly say that things have been on the downslide since 1966.

Not everyone believes in the Christian God, and it is not the government's function to promote religion (see the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution). That is the role of the various churches and other establishments.

In short, your views are contrary to the Constitutional principles that have been the core of American government for well over two centuries. The United States owes its greatness to notions of justice and reason -- these are essential to a free society.

#88 Post by **K. Eng** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:25 pm

Kyocera wrote:Way to go skitty.

I don't see why people should be congratulated for making arguments that aren't backed by reason or sound legal principles. A paper that deserves an 'F' should not be given an 'A'.

Unless you were being sarcastic, in which case my sarcasm detector is not working.

skitty4gzus · #89 Post by **skitty4gzus** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:35 pm

your right, not in the declaration, it's just printed on every single paper currency which just so happens to be made by our government. Tell me the government was not founded on biblical and Christian values. Not to mention our forefathers were not "religious" but they were Christians. Religion is a cop out and for folks who only want to be "religious" on certain holidays, marriages, and funerals, and when they get into trouble. So no im not religious at all. I am a christian just like our forefathers who founded this nation on Christ and biblical examples. Check out this link if you think thats a wash.

http://christianparty.net/patrickhenry.htm

#90 Post by **Kyocera** » Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:43 pm

No, i was not being sarcastic at all. I just happened to like what he wrote. Sometimes it's nice to read stuff that people actually think about and believe from the heart, instead of a bunch of [censored] links to more crap and holier than thou diatribes and opinions stated as true facts.

US mid-term elections and the political divide

Language and Culture

Re: Language and Culture

Who is online