MOAR HATEFollow

Says you.

Other languages aside, there are some folks that simply can't hear - English or any other language, and others that can't read...anything. Old people can't see so well anymore.

Why must English be an official language of the US?

Based on what?

Thanks, pensive, I appreciate the offer. It's true that I'm trying harder, but I'm afraid you yelling at me wouldn't do it. I don't want a phony flame war, I want the real thing. I don't want to cut down villagers in Oblivion, Pensive - I want to kill real people.

Metaphorically, that is.

If I go to live in Japan, France, Germany, and so on, should I expect everything to be written in English? I hardly think so. I would learn the language of that country if I wanted to live there. To expect a whole country to adapt to me would be arrogant in the extreme. Likewise if someone else comes to live here, they should learn English, rather than expecting things to be provided in whatever their native tongue is.

You think you can go to the states and expect not to have to learn English? You're far far more likely to get good English support out of the states, then the reverse.

Coming back and rereading this it just got even funnier You need to get out more shador.

Assimilation is pretty much guaranteed over time. The traditional standard is three generations but there's been studies suggesting that Hispanic immigrants are actually assimilating faster than previous waves of Asian, Slavic, South European, etc immigrants did. I imagine modern media and culture has a lot to do with that and the fact that the kids at school will be talking about what they saw on Ugly Betty rather than Betty la Fea.

I'm always amused that people in these debates pull out something like "I'd learn French if I lived in France!" and never admit that, perhaps, if they moved to Hong Kong they'd be comfortable enough among the quarter million English speakers there that learning fluent Catonese wouldn't be their foremost and immediate priority. No doubt, each and everyone one of them would have Catonese down pat before daring to get an apartment there.

We could use the census data to find and throw out all non-English communicators!

We'd better get to finishing that wall. Terrorists can't climb.

Omg, Peeps all-over-the-world will all be speaking text-talk within the next couple decades. Lol Together.










Edited, Oct 1st 2009 8:33pm by Elinda

Gonna back this up a tad, since I've been busy today. Darn work...



False. While I'm sure there were examples of conservatives suckered into the strawman position on this, the real argument was that the actions of the Bush administration with regards to the "War on Terror" did not constitute a reduction of our liberties here at home. Federal power projected outward does not infringe the liberties of its citizens. Federal power projected inwards does.

This is another example of the Left labeling a position in a negative way, then applying the negative label to anyone who defends said position. You decide that the war on terror equals an infringement of our liberties, and declare that anyone defending said war is therefore defending infringement of our liberties. This is a well-worn Liberal tactic. Label your position in positives and the opposition in negatives and then just apply the label to the people who take the positions. So you're fighting for rights if you support gay marriage, but I'm infringing rights if I opposed it. You're helping the poor if you support welfare, and I'm hurting the poor if I oppose it. You're fighting racism by supporting affirmative action, and I'm a racist for opposing it.


Yup. Same tactic. Over and over...




There was no warrantless wiretapping program on domestic phone lines. That was a BS bit of semantic trickery when it was first invented by the left wing blogosphere and it's embarrassing that you're still repeating it as though it's fact. Palin's "death panels" have more factual reality than the imaginary NSA wiretaps on US citizens, which apparently affected not one single US person over that 8 year period of time.


The problem here is that most Liberals seem to decide whether something protects of infringes rights based solely on whether it's their people doing it. Yet you call us hypocritical? Funny...