English-Only Advocates Whine and Moan Under Misspelled Banner

[Facial_King]

This is pretty hilarious. A few points:

1. If you're going to pay for a professionally printed banner, you should spell-check both your input and the finished product (whether you do it yourself or have someone else do it).

2. If you're going to have a conference where attendees are likely to be endorsing "official language" (English) and English-only policies, #1 above is at least twice as important if you wish to avoid looking like a complete dumb-ass.
And if Pat Buchanan is at your conference, you can be pretty sure both of those topics will come up (in addition to a bunch of other racist shit).

3. If the error had been spotted, even at the last minute, a nice blue felt marker would have been better than nothing, I think - again, especially considering the context.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/22/misspelled-english-buchanan/

 

[titsrock]

What's insulting is that the Republicans would try to smear a "working class" person such as Sotomayor for trying to better herself (and suceeding in the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY) and yet in the same conference they are trying to concoct schemes to "attract working class Democrats"?

Have Republicans always been this corrupt and inept and mean? Shame on them. At least they are being upfront with their racism, I suppose.

By the way, reading children's books, like the Berenstain Bears, is an excellent way to learn English Grammar. In part, that's what those books are meant to do!

Of course, Sotomayor was reading higher level "classics" than actual children's books.

I suppose if Sotomayor had learned English from reading the Bible and watching Ronald Reagan movies that would have been acceptable for Pat Douchebag Buchanan?

 

[Member2019]

There are excellent examples everywhere ...

There are excellent examples everywhere of this. Including on countless, public infrastructure, roads and even buildings. I see them regularly.

Oh, Republicans must have built those "public works" too.

Seriously now, it's very humorous, but it's hardly a Republican-only detail. I've known many Democrat voting individuals who have not been the brightest bulbs and bigots worse than any Republicans I personally know -- one section of my in-laws that my wife and I avoid (sadly enough).

You'll find under-educated and less-than-open-minded people on both sides of the political spectrum. And if it comes down to intellect being equated to spelling, then I'm a complete idiot. A couple of times people have jumped on me as well, in front of others.

Of course, I don't jump on them when they make simple mathematical errors. And I wouldn't arrogantly ask them to even remotely explain a system of equations, even when it is relevant to the work they do on their job (where they "fudge" everything).

Much less when I started to warn them about the financial non-sense of the .COM boom in 1999, Q2-Q4 of 2000 and how layoffs were coming in Q1 2001, how the housing market in 2005 was going to implode because people were buying houses on interest-only and APR loans for overpriced real estate and countless other things.

And the current debt of the US by mid-to-late next year should radically change the value of the US dollar. But I'm just an idiot, and don't know anything because I cannot spell.

 

[darkwarrior3007]

Instead of worrying about Americans being forced to learn a second language maybe they should worry about trying to teach Americans that were born in the USA on how to speak and write the English language correctly since many of them obviously don't know how. Maybe they can start with "See Spot Run".:dunno: This reminds me of when I was 16 years old and I was bagging groceries at the local Shop Rite. I offered to help a customer bring her groceries to her car because she was an elderly woman and she had quite a few heavy bags. For the purpose of this trip down memory lane I must say that the customer was white and I'm black. Anyway after I loaded the bags into her car she turned to me and thanked me. The very next thing out of her mouth was "Stay in school and learn good English!" I literally looked at her and said "It's learn to speak English well!" I then turned around and walked back to the store.

 

[titsrock]

Instead of worrying about Americans being forced to learn a second language maybe they should worry about trying to teach Americans that were born in the USA on how to speak and write the English language correctly since many of them obviously don't know how. Maybe they can start with "See Spot Run".:dunno:

I'm just appalled that the Republicans would smear a person who did exactly what the GOP likes to campaign on--come to the land of opportunity, go to school, rise up and be a success--and then in the same breath utter, "Well, so how are we gonna capture the vote of the working class anyway?" It's preposterous that they think splitting the working class into --the whites who we want/and the rest who we don't want--is at all feasible. And since they are so focused on winning the 2010/12 elections already, I guess they have no plans on actually taking part in the political process? :dunno:

The racist tenor *flowing* throughout the Republican Party needs to stop if they ever hope to mount a serious counter to the Democrats.

 

[Philbert]

What's insulting is that the Republicans would try to smear a "working class" person such as Sotomayor for trying to better herself (and suceeding in the LAND OF OPPORTUNITY) and yet in the same conference they are trying to concoct schemes to "attract working class Democrats"?

Have Republicans always been this corrupt and inept and mean? Shame on them. At least they are being upfront with their racism, I suppose.

By the way, reading children's books, like the Berenstain Bears, is an excellent way to learn English Grammar. In part, that's what those books are meant to do!

Of course, Sotomayor was reading higher level "classics" than actual children's books.

I suppose if Sotomayor had learned English from reading the Bible and watching Ronald Reagan movies that would have been acceptable for Pat Douchebag Buchanan?

Well, since Sotomayor grew up in the US, why did she need to learn English grammar in college? Maybe she was a "parrot" scholar, and needed to actually express things in proper English...and she was unable to do so having been totally immersed in her "Latina" world. Not a good background for someone who would need to make fair judgments as a judge for all peoples, not just minorities and females.
She did make her way due in large part to affirmative action, not exactly on her own accomplishments. She has said as much...

But I digress... you make some serious accusations...can you point out a specific racist platform or declaration by the GOP? Not the usual general GOP bad, Dems good BS, but a specific racist GOP policy, plank, or official declaration from a GOP leader.
I wait with bated breath...
But I probably have a long wait; there is a big difference between just calling anyone or thing racist, it's a lot harder to actually back it up.
The NAACP is a racist org, the Black Caucus in the Senate is a racist group, it's odd that you only mention White Cultural groups as "racist" bad, but leave out La Raza and other Racist groups ('cause Sotomayor is a member of La Raza, maybe?).

 

[Member2019]

But I digress... you make some serious accusations...can you point out a specific racist platform or declaration by the GOP? Not the usual general GOP bad, Dems good BS, but a specific racist GOP policy, plank, or official declaration from a GOP leader.

They can't. In all honesty, the few areas where the GOP (not the right-wing media analysts) has taken issue with her, is in the full context of some of her statements. Some were made in jest, but others were made in great and pure, racial arrogance. Some of it was troubling indeed, because it went beyond the "experience for viewpoint" and into the "no viewpoints are valid but these."

I honestly wish people would separate the right-wing media analysts from the Republican leadership and representatives. They are not saying the same things. That's the left painting Rush Limbaugh as the leader of the GOP, because he's easy to disregard. But when Republicans actually agree with the Democrats in some areas, but not others (and not just Rush's "anything but Obama"), that's what the leftists -- let alone minority-driven PACs -- don't want to address.

The NAACP is a racist org, the Black Caucus in the Senate is a racist group, it's odd that you only mention White Cultural groups as "racist" bad

I actually have to also agree with you here.

I've noted that the NAACP has been at odds with the Urban League on many occasions, and the complaints of the Urban League are legitimate at times. The Urban League seems to be honestly concerned with underprivileged minorities in a broad sense, whereas the NAACP doesn't even make it about race, but seems to expense some for even already affluent African Americans. The Affirmative Action v. 10% Rule on college entrance is one area where the two differ.

Furthermore, the Pendulum Swing of the Democrats from the "more racist" past the "equality stake" of the Republicans to the "more affirmative" post Democrat LBJ + Republican Congress Equal Rights Act constantly makes me wonder at what people will "wake up" to the fact that Republicans went from being "radical" on civil rights for 100 years to "conservative" for the last 30-40, and why is that?

Lastly, the Duke LaCrosse fiasco caused not merely myself, but even some in various minority organizations to question the systematic destruction of civil liberties in a, now, opposing manner. One has to wonder how much the term "racist" has been diluted in any age where disagreement defines it, instead of actual racism. The constant barrage of that term towards Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and anyone people disagree with tends to cause that.

I mean, Rush is a hypocrite and an asshole, but hardly a racist, let alone he's purposely confrontational (like much of the analyst media). Worse yet are the African Americans involved in Rush's media organization who are called Uncle Toms. O'Reilly is just an overbearing asshole at times, but he's actually very moderate in his individual views on marriage, rights and whatnot, and not afraid to admit when he's wrong (e.g., WMD's in Iraq). Calling O'Reilly a racist for merely exposing the systematic issues that Affirmative Action is causing is also diluting the word.

Even Obama is the son of an African Immigrant. As much as he claims he has been exposed to many aspects of being an African American, and represents much, I think he overplays it to the point that one must question the sincerity of it at times -- at least in the context of African Americans of many generations, systematically denied education and opportunity, which has fucked them for generations upon generations of off-spring, unlike Obama's opportunities which he had plenty. Obama is not this "I pulled myself out of the hood" character that some people try to associate him as.

That's what gets to me. The NAACP makes it about race in everything, underprivileged or not. Organizations like the Urban League makes it about education and opportunity of the underprivileged. And the Duke LaCrosse episode utterly destroyed my faith in any ability for anyone who is not considered a minority in popular culture to have their civil rights respected. Even worse was the fact that any minority leader that "grew a conscience" was threatened with professional suicide by speaking out about the team's civil liberties being systematically violated.

At some point, people have to realize that no matter how one feels "fucked by the system for generations," equally fucking someone else in return does not make things "better." It just shows that one can be just as capable as another, when it comes to racism and denial of basic, civil liberties.

 

[titsrock]

Well, since Sotomayor grew up in the US, why did she need to learn English grammar in college? Maybe she was a "parrot" scholar, and needed to actually express things in proper English...and she was unable to do so having been totally immersed in her "Latina" world. Not a good background for someone who would need to make fair judgments as a judge for all peoples, not just minorities and females.
She did make her way due in large part to affirmative action, not exactly on her own accomplishments. She has said as much...

She was born and raised in the Bronx "projects," Philbert. That is not middle or upper middle suburbs. Any academic deficiencies she had before entering high school and Princeton, which she attended on scholarship, she obviously overcame. If you can point out affirmative action in her background, let me know. All I'm aware of is that she earned her way through securing scholarships.

The article mentions that GOP douches like Pat Buchanan made fun of her background. :dunno:

But I digress... you make some serious accusations...can you point out a specific racist platform or declaration by the GOP? Not the usual general GOP bad, Dems good BS, but a specific racist GOP policy, plank, or official declaration from a GOP leader.
I wait with bated breath...

I suggest Scope to fix baited breath. It works everytime.:thumbsup:

There have been 3 public instances of Racist behavior by GOP staff members in the past 2 weeks alone. Most involve circulating racist emails. Perhaps there actually is a racist-platform for the GOP being shaped right now, in time for 2010.

But I probably have a long wait; there is a big difference between just calling anyone or thing racist, it's a lot harder to actually back it up.
The NAACP is a racist org, the Black Caucus in the Senate is a racist group, it's odd that you only mention White Cultural groups as "racist" bad, but leave out La Raza and other Racist groups ('cause Sotomayor is a member of La Raza, maybe?).

The NAACP is not racist. The Black Caucus is not racist. La Raza is not racist; it's a civil rights organization with ties to Cesar Chavez and the migrant farmer's rights movement of the 60s/70s. If Whitey didn't oppress nonwhities--these orgs wouldn't exist today or would never have been founded in all likelyhood. MECHA is a radical student org that is pretty much forgotten today. I think they walk the line of racism, where the KKK crossed that line.

 

[Member2019]

She was born and raised in the Bronx "projects," Philbert. That is not middle or upper middle suburbs. Any academic deficiencies she had before entering high school and Princeton, which she attended on scholarship, she obviously overcame.

Indeed I noted that. At the same time, she clearly has a "chip on her shoulder" as a result. That's not ideal for a judge, let alone a "Supreme" one.

I'm not saying that she shouldn't be. I'm just saying the criticism of her comments, in their full context, are calculated, hardly racist, and are questionable. The fact that some suggest they "should not be touched" are the problem. Everything is open to scrutiny, where it can be for "objective" reasons.

The article mentions that GOP douches like Pat Buchanan made fun of her background. :dunno:

No offense, but this is getting old.

Pat Buchanan has continually proved in every Republican primary why he's not remotely close to winning the Republican primary -- not now, not ever.

If you keep wanting to throw up Pat Buchanan as an example of Republican representation, why don't we equally through up David Duke? Both have flaked around many political parties, for their various reasons. Neither represent any sizeable majority in any party at all.

Although both have been entertaining when it comes to New Hampshire at times.

There have been 3 public instances of Racist behavior by GOP staff members in the past 2 weeks alone.

Dude, don't go there. Several Obama staffers hit several good ones during his campaign trail. At this point, you're really stretching.

While I don't agree with some of Philbert's comments, the fact that you're stretching to the edge of the Republican party for rhetoric that one could easily find in the Democrat camp too.

Most involve circulating racist emails. Perhaps there actually is a racist-platform for the GOP being shaped right now, in time for 2010.

Argumentative and unrealistic.

The NAACP is not racist.

Using your same logic, they are, as is the Rainbow Coalition, among others. Last time I checked, Jesse Jackson is a damn big time bigot -- both racial and anti-semitic. Dude, get off the singularities and stretches. We could go all day.

It's these type of stretches that are done by both sides that could also and quite easily associate Obama with the Black Panthers. In fact, it's because Democrats like yourself were so quick to do that with W., McCain and anyone even remotely associated with the Republican party, that any and all associates of Obama were equally put to that same "stretch-rhetoric" approach.

That's the problem. Stop jerking the non-sense and get to some meat. You cannot, and that's why you stretch.

And, yes, I classify several leaders in the NAACP to be "racist." Again, I cared less before the Duke LaCrosse episode, but I've become a far more avid reader of several legal journals on civil rights since. It's amazing to see things in reverse now. We're starting to see some major cases of systematic government (beyond just prior media and political group) sponsored denial of civil rights of people because they are simply white.

 

[titsrock]

Indeed I noted that. At the same time, she clearly has a "chip on her shoulder" as a result. That's not ideal for a judge, let alone a "Supreme" one.

So, because she didn't grow up on Mayberry Lane, yet graduated from Princton and Law School, you think she has a "chip on her shoulder"? I don't think I've ever read a more insulting and insensitive thing from you, Prof That's a very elitist attitude to have.

No offense, but this is getting old.

Pat Buchanan has continually proved in every Republican primary why he's not remotely close to winning the Republican primary -- not now, not ever.

Pat is a card carrying member of the GOP, Prof. This conference, if you bothered to click on Facial's link, which I'm not sure you did this time, then you'd probably catch the "Conservative" target audience and purpose of the conference "How Conservative can win back our majority":dunno: Are there other Conservatives in America who held a political majority before? I'm only aware of the Republicans....:dunno: Your Libbys have never been organized enough (constant infighting is a Libertarian Party trademark, btw) or had membership numbers to make anyone, even the GOP, sweat...:wave2:

The GOP racist incidents that I referred to, and which you want to sweep under the carpet, apparently, did not occur 'on the campaign trail.' They occured during "official" work hours by existing staff members.

 

[sproing99]

U.S. racists don't have a monopoly on stupidity. Here in the UK the BNP (British National Party) campaign against immigration. In particular in this case immigration from Eastern Europe.

To support their position they had a picture of a Spitfire and a message relating to the Battle of Britain. They made a couple of small mistakes:

- The version was a type not in use during the Battle of Britain

and more amusingly....

- The plane was from a Polish squadron

I mean you couldn't make it up.

 

[Member2019]

One of these days ...

So, because she didn't grow up on Mayberry Lane, yet graduated from Princton and Law School, you think she has a "chip on her shoulder"? I don't think I've ever read a more insulting and insensitive thing from you, Prof That's a very elitist attitude to have.

Dude, it comes out pretty damn good in the entire context of her writing. I call a "chip on someone's shoulder" when I see it. I didn't say it wan't justified. I said it is what it is, and people shouldn't be called "racist" for merely pointing it out.

One of these days you're going to fucking maintain context with me. Until then, you'll just argue with yourself, out-of-context.

Pat is a card carrying member of the GOP, Prof. This conference, if you bothered to click on Facial's link, which I'm not sure you did this time, then you'd probably catch the "Conservative" target audience and purpose of the conference "How Conservative can win back our majority":dunno: Are there other Conservatives in America who held a political majority before? I'm only aware of the Republicans....:dunno:

And how many different Democrat and Republican committees differ from their mainstream parties?

That is what I honestly don't get. You Democrats, like Republicans, take one segment of the other party and hold it up, "See! See! They're all like that!"

Again, you don't have to be a Rocket Scientist to recognize how much of the Republican Party Pat represents. Is it significant? Sure. Is it anywhere near the majority? Nope. Not a chance.

If you want to talk about "the worst" in the Democrat or Republican parties by pointing to select conferences, go ahead. But if you want to slam down any conference or seminar put on by anyone with any influence in a as "the template" for the Democrat or Republican party, ask yourself a simple question ... "when the last time this guy/gal took any remotely viable percentage of the overall primary?"

Your Libbys have never been organized enough (constant infighting is a Libertarian Party trademark, btw) or had membership numbers to make anyone, even the GOP, sweat...:wave2:

So be it. The fact that Libertarians disagree and argue, or better yet, sometimes even side with the Democrats on some things, Republicans on the other, does not mean they are not aligning themselves to their beliefs.

Since when does "majority" define "right"? Since when am I "wrong" because I'm in a minority? Possibly even a small minority?

I don't imagine Libertarians will ever be popular again. So be it. I have my principles. Others do the same. I'm not changing them. I'm not backing down from them.

Heck, I would even argue there are more racists in the Democrat and Republican parties than Libertarians. So be it. Maybe that means I'm a double-racist, because I "may" side with either party on an issue at any time, and they have racists that outnumber us, so we must be racists too?!

The GOP racist incidents that I referred to, and which you want to sweep under the carpet, apparently, did not occur 'on the campaign trail.' They occured during "official" work hours by existing staff members.

Cool! What was your point again? Seriously, I've read the same and they are real stretches.

Again, how many times do people have to not only stretch to fit their argument, but then turn around and complain about the counter-argument made? By your same stretches on what Pat does "as the standard representation of what the GOP platform is," one could argue that Obama is a Black Panther.

Both are laughable.

 

[bodie54]

Furthermore, the Pendulum Swing of the Democrats from the "more racist" past the "equality stake" of the Republicans to the "more affirmative" post Democrat LBJ + Republican Congress Equal Rights Act constantly makes me wonder at what people will "wake up" to the fact that Republicans went from being "radical" on civil rights for 100 years to "conservative" for the last 30-40, and why is that?

Why is that?
You said it yourself; It basically boils down to the issue of race.
The seminal moment can be traced to Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965, an act that guaranteed the ballot to all citizens regardless of race. Thereafter the Dixiecrats left their ancestral party in droves and formed the base of a new and far more conservative GOP. And Johnson predicted his southern bretheren would have exactly that reactionary response to his civil rights agenda.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

Yup.

You would think the "Prof" would know that.

 

[Member2019]

And yet ...

Why is that?
You said it yourself; It basically boils down to the issue of race.
The seminal moment can be traced to Johnson signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965, an act that guaranteed the ballot to all citizens regardless of race. Thereafter the Dixiecrats left their ancestral party in droves and formed the base of a new and far more conservative GOP. And Johnson predicted his southern bretheren would have exactly that reactionary response to his civil rights agenda.

And yet, it was the Republicans in Congress that got it passed!
That's what you guys love to "conveniently omit."
Is there any end to the one-sided bullshit around here?
Seriously, this more than proves it yet again!

 

[Facial_King]

Re: And yet ...

And yet, it was the Republicans in Congress that got it passed!
That's what you guys love to "conveniently omit."
Is there any end to the one-sided bullshit around here?
Seriously, this more than proves it yet again!

Obviously, there are plenty of racists (and non-racists) within both parties, but I also think it's safe to say that both parties have changed and evolved significantly since the 1960s.

 

[Mr.Bungle]

Nation of whiners.....................

 

[TITS KING]

that is :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

 

[D-rock]

The mistake is kind of ironic and a little embarrassing, but the substance of a message is always more important than it's delivery. You never just attack a messages delivery, especially spelling errors, it makes it seem like your avoiding the actual merit of the issue.

 

[calpoon]

Re: And yet ...

Is there any end to the one-sided bullshit around here?

Yes, if only someone could for once criticize Obama!

I thought you were a Libertarian. Why would you care what people think about the Republican party and defend it?

I could respect you from a position of trying to bust bullshit if you weren't such a fine BSer yourself- such was when you confused the argument about spelling to suggest the implication was that the people were dumb for having a spelling error instead of the actual point which was to say that it's hypocritical to denounce other people for not speaking English well if you can't speak it properly either. Talk about going out of context. Come on, man.